Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers


Sunday, December 30, 2007
Flashback: The Real John McCain
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 7:28 PM

By Patrick Ruffini

In preparation for a John McCain presidential run, I clipped out what is perhaps the seminal article on McCain’s transformation from a Goldwater conservative to a maverick quasi-Democrat during the 2000 campaign and the early Bush years. Jonathan Chait’s assessment of just how far McCain had gone to the left in the April 29, 2002 issue of The New Republic stood out even at the time. I Googled it a few years later, and saved the full text. It is no longer available on TNR’s website.

The piece is heavy on speculation of a McCain presidential run as a Democrat. That issue has been discussed in this campaign. But it also sets the context in which these rumors swirled, laying out factual reasons for why John McCain (D-AZ) made sense. McCain was the chief Republican enabler of the Democrat-led Senate not just on campaign finance, but on taxes, health care, CAFE standards, guns, global warming, and corporate governance. People who were not active in politics in the first year of the Bush presidency may wonder “Why all the fuss?” about McCain. This article is why.

McCain denies ever considering a party switch, but he certainly did allow his aides, including then-Democrats John Weaver and Marshall Wittmann, to flirt with the idea:

John Weaver hunches his angular frame over a Styrofoam cup of coffee in the basement cafeteria of the United States Senate and tries to explain what might seem–to an outsider–his peculiar political loyalties. Once a loyal Republican strategist who directed the presidential aspirations of ber-conservative Phil Gramm and helped plot John McCain’s maverick primary run in 2000, he has since reregistered as a Democrat and severed consulting ties to all Republicans except McCain, for whom he still serves as chief strategist. “I only work for Democrats now,” he tells me. Noticing that he has overlooked the party affiliation of his most prominent advisee, I helpfully add: “And John McCain.” Weaver shrugs his shoulders and grins, “Oh, right.”

On his transformation during the 2000 campaign:

Pretty soon McCain was veering off in directions nobody could have foreseen even a few months before, openly pointing out that Bush’s tax cut favored the rich and attacking influential religious conservatives like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell as “forces of evil.” As Marshall Wittmann, who advised McCain during the primary, puts it, “Ideologically, we all changed.”

Note: Wittmann was an ur-weblogger in 2001, blogging at “The Bull Moose,” which I read daily. A McCain independent run was a prominent hobbyhorse of his, and he was later hired back as McCain’s Senate communications director.

The prominent issues on which McCain sided with Democrats and against Republicans are as long as my arm, including a much-overlooked attack on Second Amendment rights:

The degree to which McCain has abandoned contemporary conservatism is reflected in the legislative program he has championed since Bush took office. Most notably, of course, he shepherded campaign finance reform–an effort that put him in close cooperation with Democrats in Congress. McCain also collaborated with liberal Democrats John Edwards and Ted Kennedy on a patients’ bill of rights; with Charles Schumer on more widespread sale of generic prescription drugs; with Ernest Hollings to put federal employees in charge of airport security–all of which set him against fierce business lobbying. And he teamed up with Evan Bayh to promote AmeriCorps, an effort Bush later co-opted with his own smaller AmeriCorps boost.

But perhaps most amazing has been McCain’s willingness to take stands even many Democrats are afraid of. He voted against Bush’s tax cut, the centerpiece of the new president’s agenda. Along with John Kerry, he sponsored legislation to raise automobile emissions standards, and he paired with Joe Lieberman to try to force Bush to reduce greenhouse gases in compliance with the Kyoto accord. Also with Lieberman, McCain has proposed forcing people who buy firearms at gun shows to undergo background checks–closing the “gun-show loophole”–even as most Democrats shy away from any form of gun control. He has infuriated the gambling industry by proposing to ban wagering on college sports. And along with Carl Levin, he has co-sponsored a bill to force companies that deduct executive stock options from their taxes to disclose the cost on their financial statements–another effort few Democrats have been willing to join.

It was no wonder that,

on high-profile issues, McCain’s legislative coalitions consist entirely, or almost entirely, of Democrats.

McCain likes to paint himself as the true economic conservative in the race. Here’s what he was saying on this just a few years ago, sounding more like Upton Sinclair than Ronald Reagan:

In the last year though his ideology has grown coherently progressive. “We have had regulatory agencies always to curb the abuses or potential abuses of the capitalist system,” he said earlier this year on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “This is not a totally laissez-faire country.”

And here is his dodgy, conflicted rhetoric on Life:

Moreover, it has gotten hard to discern to what degree McCain is actually anti-abortion at all. At one point during his primary run, he told a reporter that “certainly in the short term or even the long term I would not support the repeal of Roe v. Wade.” Another time, when asked what he would do if his daughter sought an abortion, McCain replied that he’d leave the final decision to her. In both instances, he restated his anti-abortion position after the ensuing uproar, but polls showed that voters believed he was pro-choice. In the last year McCain reversed himself and came out in favor of stem-cell research. So while it’s hard to figure out where he stands, the best guess is that he remains personally against abortion but neutral, or even opposed to, making it illegal.

None of this is entirely new. But since June of 2004 (when McCain did an about-face from his role as Kerry surrogate-in-chief against the Swiftvets, and decided to campaign actively for the President), he has done a surprisingly good job of cloaking his Senate record. For months, we have heard him talk about nothing except the war and earmarks. In this topsy-turvy campaign, it’s easy for Republicans to get caught up in the other candidates’ flaws and forget why they distrusted McCain.

This piece is a vivid reminder why, in living color. I’ve reposted it in full below so you can judge for yourself.

Read it before you vote.

UPDATE from Hugh:  I have deleted the Chaitt article as I don't see a reprint permission from TNR or Jonathan Chaitt.   If we get the OK, I will be pleased to repost it.



View in ascending order View in descending order
clarityseeker writes: Tuesday, January, 01, 2008 9:34 AM
Priggsy
Envy is a very ugly trait----and so unbecoming of you.
But then, what is becoming of you?
NeoConScum writes: Tuesday, January, 01, 2008 8:56 AM
Briggs...We Gonna 'Hep Ya, Boy
right up till the time ya can 'hep yersef. We're Givers, Podna. Goal for 2008: 1.)Reverse the effects of Briggsy's lobotomy.2.)Crushing defeat of the Dems.3.)Kill al Qaeda and all its offshoots.

Hey, priorities are important.
SDN writes: Tuesday, January, 01, 2008 7:51 AM
Three "Republicans" I will not support
no matter what.

Ron Paul: Just plain nuts.
Mike Huckabee: Bill Clinton with a tinsel halo. Our first televangelist President, straight out of the Oral Roberts / Jim Bakker / Jimmy Swaggert mold.
John McCain: When he answered a reporters question, "Which would you rather have, the First Amendment or clean government?" by saying he'd rather have clean government, he violated the oath he swore, as officer, Senator, and would swear as President to uphold the Constitution. Sorry, I neither forgive nor forget an oathbreaker.
NeoConScum writes: Tuesday, January, 01, 2008 12:42 AM
Clarity...Done Deal !
2008 here in Florida now. Thanks, my friend.
Paddy's almost never seen anymore. I remember him talking about a 'possible' blog. Don't know 2/3-3/4 of the people around here lately. Still some good ones...Elderscapes, Ted, Joe(when he's not Pi**ing me ;-)off), etc...

Listen to me! Been here 5-months and lamenting the passing of the 'old days'!
EscapingAbsalom writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 10:38 PM
Mitt Romney vs. John McCain

1) Mitt Romney was once a small varmint hunter John McCain was a Navy Pilot
2) Mitt Romney for a time opposed Ronald Reagan John McCain was endorsed by Ronald Reagan
3) Mitt Romney back in the day supported abortion on demand John McCain has a 24 years Pro-Life record
4) Mitt Romney dreamed of marching with Martin Luther King and his dad John McCain refused to be released from prison JUST because of his dad
5) Mitt Romney sons work for their daddy’s campaign John McCain sons serve America, one as a Marine in Iraq
6) Mitt Romney has done his usual dance with Immigration (as with everything else) John McCain wanted to give his country a solution in the matter (I must admit probably NOT the way to do it) taking the heat upon himself
7) Mitt Romney always attacks those he perceives as threats to his seasonally political ambitions John McCain’s has loved and served America, an ambition that still consumes him
8) Well…Mitt Romney has a great set of hair BUT John McCain has a Way GREATER character
9) The choice is clear:
10) Go Baby MaC!
clarityseeker writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 6:07 PM
NeoCon
No offense taken here by anything you've penned. Merely commenting on your involvement with the chattering class, that's all.
FYI---While scrolling through the morass of nonsense on any particular thread---I always go to yours with desire for, at very least, a smile.

THEN, and only then, do I go to the likes of PL+LP+IP+Pil+iLP+Lip+postmodernist patriot+allthingsconservativesuck patriot+allthingsliberalareacceptable Patriot to give thanks for my simple mind, and my unapologetic identity with the greatest country on this sphere.
Then I glance over at the incredible arrogance and ignorance of one, Broberta, Priggsy and some others. I do this while pinching myself in full-blown appreciation that I am not one of them. Finally, I look for the unfettered support of unionized-business models, organized-crime, er, labor structures espoused by, "laboriouslawyer".

neoCon, celebrate this evening responsibly and do not forget to give thanks for who you are.
NeoConScum writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 5:43 PM
Friend Clarity...I've Had Too Much
Leisure time the past few days, probably. Not sure I'm getting your full intent, but hope I've not offended you some way. Brother, I don't know about you, OHM, Dusty, 'Hawk, MaryS & others of our persuasion hereabouts, but I'm kind of missing the bonehead Lefties. This huge flypaper swatch attracting Hucksters, Paulies and now McCaniacs ain't nearly as much fun as slaying dastardly Lefties! I don't stay up on any of the minutae of the primaries. No interest, combined with no time. Just the high spots.

Very, Very Best to you and yours in 2008, my Friend.
Dustoff-507 writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 12:30 PM
Mc Nut
Ok all you McCain lovers. Please answer this question. Why does the MSN love McCain SO much.

They carry his water and when the time comes, they will smear him like no other.

His past will come back to get him.
And no I'm not talking about his POW past.
sid writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 12:08 PM
The Real Mitty or John McCain
I'll take the Real McCain over the real mitty anyday. Fact - GWB woud not have been re-elected in 04 without John McCain - not because he loves GWB but because he was and is obligated to the troops in Iraq. Now the people who praised him for supporting GWB - bash him. Hughy - do you think mitty would have stood for supporting the troops in 04 if it meant he would take guff for it later on? We all know the answer - no. Mainstream Americans what problems solved, that means working with people you don't agree with. Mitty doesn't bother to work with those he disagrees with, he mearly becomes them -especially if it gets him more power. John McCain has positions he believes in whether it helps him politically or not. That's what Americans want. This is what makes America the country it is. What will Mitty do the first time he faces a tough challenge that requires him to take a stand the many, if most people disagree? I think we have the answer to that - he will run in the direction that provides the most cover. We are at a point in history where we simply can't afford that. Hughy - your guy isn't the one with the courage - on any level - to bring us where we need to be. We need integrity, not fake and false perfection, we need humility, not "I'm so special I can hardly stand myself", we need a human being who knows what it's like to take the punches and not run to the nearest foxhole for cover. We need John McCain. Happy New Year All
clarityseeker writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 11:48 AM
Neocon
Continue reading your comments, etc.
Gotta admit, it's sad to see you get sucked into this vacuous vortex of mindless chatter regarding a too-early campaigning process and all the back-biting.
That's all it is.
Lest you forget, I am a conservative and nothing is changing that, including LP+PL+IP+Pil+Lip's equally mindless methodologies to denigrate this present-day (conservative) ideology---and somehow ignore the vast amount of weaknesses, failures, misdirections, flat-out misrepresentations of his Leftist party, its representatives, and all of its present-day machinations (MoveOn.org's, MSM, et al).
NeoCon, I continue to read. I continue to observe from the sidelines while all too often shaking my head. Please tell me though:
1.) what has been accomplished these last 6 months by all this chatter? Especially while contemplating that a few short months from now, not much would be materially different had it started in traditional time-lines.
All I see is wheel-spinning, gratuitous mud-slinging, flagrantly flaunted flatulance, and worse.
A very happy new year to you and your family.
NeoConScum writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 9:58 AM
Fred's Message To & About Democrats
taking their Party back from the Lefty-Nutters is a truly good one. Needs to be hammered home in the General Election campaign by whomever our candidate is. Joe Liberman can be a very effective message carrier to Dems of the strong national defense-stay on the offense against jihad persuasion, as well.

Thompson & McCain are friends from Senate days, I take it. But John has come a long, goofy way since Fred supported him in 2000. If he does support McCain later in this campaign, it would say something about Fred's 'conservative' core.

CabanaBoy: No problemo from me, Kid. I have huge reservations about McCain, but would support him with time & $$ in the general Election, if it came to that. Things can get heated around here, but most of us--obviously, you included--are for a Republican Victory in November. No cynicism on your part occurred to me, nor does it now. Glad you're here. OHM and I can seem like irascible curmudgeons, but, honest, we are just sensitive little fuzzballs inside. :-)
Thaale writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 9:35 AM
Don't we WANT candidates to move right?
I thought the whole point of the 2008 campaign is that we are enjoined to ignore everything politicians did or said prior to about 2006 – on the grounds that as long as they currently claimed to espouse conservative principals, their preceding decades of liberal governance were irrelevant.

But now the anti-McCain smoking gun is that from 2002 to 2004, a lot of Dems harbored fantasies about McCain switching parties and/or accepting a position on the Kerry ticket? McCain himself slapped down the Kerry overtures. He has proven that he won’t jump into bed with the Dems, even when the prize is a good shot at the vice presidency. Can anyone honestly say with 100% certainty that if a similar choice had been offered to either of the two ambitious northeastern classical liberals in the GOP race, that Giuliani or Romney would have turned Kerry down?

I don’t think it’s any secret that McCain wasn’t in lockstep with the GOP party leadership in the years immediately following 2000, and understandably so. But in the past four years, there has not been a stronger and more consistent defender of the war against terror than Senator McCain – including the Bush administration itself.

As a once-relevant commentator named Hugh Hewitt used to remember and remind the rest of us of, the problem with many candidates isn’t what they believe is important, it’s what they underemphasize or ignore. By their policies, they are inadvertently trying to get the rest of us killed. While the theological wars rage around the Huckabee and Romney campaigns, and doubters question whether Giuliani and Thompson have enough energy and focus to go the distance, the one constant is that the only incumbent with a national position remains a stalwart in the war against terror.

BTW, how’s that Hewitt-Barnett dead pool for Senator McCain going? Any winner yet?
pt writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 9:17 AM
Of course FT is going to endorse McCain

FT is going to endorse JM. if McCain loses, he will endorse RG ... as will MH.
there is a highly obvious disdain for MR. wonder why? Duh!

no significant change in InTrade, IEM or Rasmussen this morning. MR up in Iowa and NH and trails RG by 5% nationally on InTrade.
Remember I predict MR de facto gone after big NH defeat and Michigan loss.

Strategic Vision CEO: "I'd Put My Money on McCain."

"David E. Johnson, CEO of Strategic Vision polling company is predicting the Republican primary will come down to a two-man race between John McCain and Mitt Romney.

"We're seeing trendlines in the direction of Romney and McCain," he just said.

He says that last cycle his organization did see late trendlines breaking towards Kerry and Edwards, who finished first and second in Iowa.

He also notes that we could, God forbid, still see an event between now and Florida that reorients the election towards terrorism, national security, and homeland security, which would help Giuliani, he contends.

"If I were to bet right now, I would be putting my money on John McCain,"
John Konop writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 8:26 AM
Thompson Endorses McCain?
I was watching the Morning Joe and they claim the rumor is out that if Thompson does badly in Iowa he may pull out and endorse McCain. In 1999 Thompson did endorse McCain over Bush.

McCain jumps in New Hampshire poll


WATCH VIDEO

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/thompson-endorses- mccain

sheryl writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 3:53 AM
McCain's temper
is a problem for me. We live in a dangerous enough world without someone with McCain's well known, well documented bad temper.
allan writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 3:34 AM
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ):
“Americans wouldn’t pick lettuce for even $50/hour”

Murmurs from the crowd turned to booing. “Pay a decent wage!” one audience member shouted.

“I’ve heard that statement before,” McCain said before threatening to leave.
. . .
But he took more questions, including a pointed one on his immigration plan.

McCain responded by saying immigrants were taking jobs nobody else wanted. He offered anybody in the crowd $50 an hour to pick lettuce in Arizona.

Shouts of protest rose from the crowd, with some accepting McCain’s job offer.

“I’ll take it!” one man shouted.

McCain insisted none of them would do such menial labor for a complete season. “You can’t do it, my friends.”

Some in the crowd said they didn’t appreciate McCain questioning their work ethic.

I don't care if John McCain spent 500 years in an NVA prison camp, he is an anti-American water boy for the plantation owners and can go fornicate himself for all I care.
Susan writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 3:22 AM
double talk express
http://therealmccain.com/
Susan writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 3:21 AM
Double talk express
http://therealmccain.com/
lnardozi writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 3:06 AM
Why not look at something IMPORTANT
The dollar slid across the board on Friday as data showing a 9 percent decline in sales of new U.S. homes last month heightened concern about the economy, putting the greenback on track for its worst week in more than a year.
The housing report, which was weaker than economists had expected, also bolstered the case for more Federal Reserve interest rate cuts in 2008. Earlier this week, the S&P/Case-Shiller index showed a record decline in U.S. home prices in October.

This is what's happening to YOUR house. All the 'money' and 'equity' you though you had saved - eliminated! The equity through falling house prices - and the money because we are DEBASING OUR CURRENCY. That low fed rate you're reading about gets created by printing money and lending it to people. With more money, the money YOU have is worth LESS. So your money is worth less and your property is worth less - where can you turn to keep ahead of inflation? I think you BETTER turn to Dr. Paul. He's the ONLY one running that has a HOPE of being able to deal with this.
JA writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 2:23 AM
The real John McCain is scary
Read the article "Free Ride: The Washington Media Love Him - Meet the Real John McCain" by Pat Murphy, former editor of the Arizona Republic, for an eye-opening look at the real John McCain

http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/24/07/murphy2407.html
MsFalconersCabanaBoy writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 1:04 AM
Well, hey. . .
I try not to get too worked up about things like this. I just can't help wondering why my choice of words was held to so much higher a standard than Romney's were with regard to his hunting, the NRA endorsement and the various Martin Luther King marches.

For the sake of clarity, I could still easily vote for Romney in the general. But, I just happen to think McCain is the right man for our times. Put Thompson on the ticket and I think you have a landslide winner.
CDubber writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 12:53 AM
MikeS
"Don't let it happen! McCain is by far the best candidate running."

Funny how when Huckabee had the lead, *he* was the best candidate running. Now that Huckabee has been exposed as a joke of a candidate, the antiRomneybots think McCain is the best guy in the field.

Once McCain gets torpedoed, I assume you'll all be moving to Thompson.

Trolls are fun to watch when they get all worked up.
Daniel writes: Monday, December, 31, 2007 12:46 AM
cornpone harry

Your hatred is running away with you. Please stop. It's embarrassing.
cornpone harry writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 11:36 PM
McCain is twice the man mitt is
Romney didnt serve our nation but he attacks a war hero?? Get outta here!

How utterly Shameful. How absolutely unbelievably shameful and despicable that this prevaricating weasel would dare to attack John McCain one of the true American heros.

John McCain's integrity, valor and courage are beyond question!

On the other hand, slick rich mitt is a pathological liar....and not a good one either!

He lied about an NRA endorsement,

he lied about illegal workers on his lawn:

He lied about seeing his liberal RINO father marching with Dr. King,

he lied about being a life long hunter,

he lied about raising fees but not taxes for mandatory abortions and other healthcare services, and killing embroyos.

Nuff said.

Piinky writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 10:32 PM
Honor McCain for many reasons!
Doug,
I am not "dishonoring" John McCain when I state my views about his record or my concerns about his positions.
But how about this ticket:
John McCain for President and Joe Lieberman for VP.
Two old party Democrats (John Kennedy types). Nothing wrong with that if you want strong defense and big government at home.
Let's just call it what it is.
Piinky writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 10:26 PM
McCain as a Democrat
Yes, John Edwards does believe in the tooth fairy.
And I could believe that John McCain is a closet Democrat.
I agree that our congressmen should work together to get things done but when John and Ted get together, it is just too much for me.
At some point in the past several months, I said I would support the Republican nominee, whomever that may be. But I would have to reconsider that decision if John McCain gets the nomination.
There is the old story of the wolf in sheep's clothing that destroyed the flock. That is my fear with Senator McCain.
I am a Romney supporter because I believe, even though he has made some gaffs in the campaign, he will stand by what he says he will do. Most of those issues seem minor to the possibility of having a liberal professing to be a Republican in the White House.
Just as McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform restricted our free speech and freedom to contribute to our favorite candidate and Kennedy-McCain immigration reform would have given carte-blanche amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants with the ZVisa, McCain appointed supreme court nominees could cripple the conservative movement for decades.
Too bad Duncan Hunter didn't make a bigger splash. Fred Thompson is looking like my second choice at this point.
MsFalconersCabanaBoy writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 10:23 PM
one hot minute
In which case, I'll simply ask you to indulge me when I type out my thoughts off-the-cuff and make the occasional "terminological inexactitude". How about if I say, instead of "one of the reasons," that it was "a catalyst"?
one hot minute writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 10:16 PM
follow-up for my friend, Cabana Boy

Cabana Boy wrote;
---------------
"It wasn't the fact that Hugh wrote that particularly saccharine ballad to Romney that changed my mind."
---------------

Oh really ?
But earlier you claimed that it WAS one of the reasons when you wrote;
---------------
"Part of what sent me over to McCain was the nearly lustful love letter Hugh wrote following Romney's speech on religion."
---------------

Those two quotes of yours do seem to contradict one another.

You also wrote,
---------------
"It was a nice speech, to be sure. But, was it worthy of all that? I figured maybe I needed to step back and re-examine this whole race before I dive into Hugh's Kool-Aid vat."
---------------

Again, friend, your focus does appear to be on what Hugh thinks of Romney's speech.
I'm not trying to pick on you, I'm merely pointing out what you wrote earlier vs. what you claim now.
Joe writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:58 PM
Of course
Dean probably thinks it is in the bag for Romney in Iowa based on the Pats winning last night. I can't blame him for that.

Just do me a favor, do not compare the Giants to Huckabee.
MikeS writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:49 PM
Here's the truth, folks
Most of you that are against McCain are so because of illegal immigration. But Hugh and the rest of the Conservative elite DON'T GIVE A CRAP about illegal immigration! Romney is going to do absolutely NOTHING about this issue. They're all using your passion about this to get their corporate guy elected. Hugh hates McCain because of the Gang of 14, but what he refuses to admit is that McCain SAVED the GOP, because Frist didn't have the guts to use the nuclear option, anyhow.

Look, Romney 's not going to win the general election. By June, you'll be wondering how such a sorry guy was chosen, and in November, you'll be looking at a Democratic landslide. Don't let it happen! McCain is by far the best candidate running.
nparga23 writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:44 PM
anti-Romney acting like losers already
As you know, the new polls now show Romney leading. Intrade has Mitt leading at 57 over Huckster.

You anti-Mitt morons are losing it like liberals with Bush derangement syndrome.

Romney will be the nominee. So sorry.

LMFAO....
Con4fred writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:44 PM
McCain and the knife
John McCain has stabbed Republicans in the back one too many times, and I'm betting that most won't forget or forgive.

For me, John is just another RINO. But so is Mitt, Rudy, and Mike.

I want a strong Conservative. That's why I'm voting for Fred!!!
Kryon77 writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:43 PM
Copyright
I guess Ruffini, the Junior High School kid hired to do Hewitt's hackwork on the night shift, never heard of copyright law.
MsFalconersCabanaBoy writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:40 PM
NeoCon, hot minute, et al. . .
That's completely fine, and entirely your prerogative. I listed above a couple of the other reasons for my change, and I seriously doubt that I'm unique in any way for it. It wasn't the fact that Hugh wrote that particularly saccharine ballad to Romney that changed my mind. It was just so over-the-top that I thought, "OK, is there really some justification for this kind of eye-roll inducing paean?" And, when I looked, there wasn't. It was a nice speech, to be sure. But, was it worthy of all that? I figured maybe I needed to step back and re-examine this whole race before I dive into Hugh's Kool-Aid vat.

Also, it wasn't the first time I'd taken a step back from Camp Romney. The first time came when the war between Romney and Giuliani was at its peak. I never was a huge Giuliani fan, but it struck me that the last person in the field who had any business questioning Giuliani's socially liberal leanings was Romney, who is by all accounts, a relative neophyte when it comes to social conservatism. He simply laid it on too thick, and I had a definite sense of a freshly gold plated pot calling a calling the cast iron kettle black.

Like I said, it was a gradual shift. Question my sincerity if you will. I can't prove it one way or the other, so I won't bother trying. I'm just speaking my mind like everyone else here.
Joe writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:29 PM
Pasadena Phil
I recall you freaking out like a Ronulan when thos illegal Guantamalans showed up on Mitt's lawn the day after last month's debate. You like to dish it out, but Romney supporters are awfully thin skinned.

So who is the real Romney, the independent who voted for Tsongas and was against Reagan-Bush or the guy who takes his cues from Hugh Hewitt and his internal GOP focus groups?
one hot minute writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:13 PM
I'm not buying Cabana's claim, either

Cabana Boy wrote;
-----------
"Part of what sent me over to McCain was the nearly lustful love letter Hugh wrote following Romney's speech on religion."
-----------

I'm with Neo and the others---I'm not buying Cabana Boy's claim, either.

For example, I can't stand John Kerry.
But if Senator Heinz were to stand on a street corner and recite a Walt Whitman poem in honor of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, it wouldn't make me "less" reverant of Brady's skills.
Brady's skills stand independent of Kerry's reverance for him, just as Mitt Romney's appeal as a candidate stands independent of what Hugh Hewitt says about him.

The Huckabee and McCain supporters are obviously angry at Hugh.
NeoConScum writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 9:05 PM
Patrick...Some of These Foaming Comments
in (over)reaction to your post remind me of a wonderful line by a bad guy in a Frakenheimer movie:"You tell a man exactly how it is...and the mutha'f***er just DOESN'T LISTEN!"

Pay them no heed, yute, they are dim bulbs on the tree. I like Rudy too, but recently switched to Mitt. But either guy is jakes with me.
Pasadena Phil writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:53 PM
You McCainiacs are nuttier than Paulbots
The people I know that are as nutty are Code Pink, PETA and the other Moveon.org crowd. That's it isn't it? You guys are part of the nuttiest of the leftiest left wing aren't you?
Dan writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:47 PM
@ Patrick
Patrick:

Fair enough, and thanks for coming on here to chat with us.

You may have been calling balls and strikes on everyone, but it sure seems to me as though a lot of strikes have been called on McCain, and with very curious timing (just as he is surging in New Hampshire).

I mean c'mon. On your website, your last 4 blog posts have been titled:

"Flashback: The Real McCain"
"Is McCain Losing It?"
"McCain in NH: Qui Bono?"
"How to Attack McCain in NH"

Have you any criticism of Romney at all? Or is it just McCain who strikes are called on?
Joe writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:46 PM
Patrick
Really this is pathetic. And Ruffini is not a Giuliani supporter, he is Hugh's lap dog doing what it takes to help Romney.
IMWITHMCCAIN writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:45 PM
Ruffini Is Hewitt's Henchman
Patrick, why would anyone listen to your lies when you are doing Hewitt's dirty work? Also, why would anyone take you serious when under your work at the RNC the GOP was blown away in 2006? McCain will win and you know it.
bovertine writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:44 PM
The definition of chtuzpah is
a Giuliani supporter talking about anybody else historical positions on life, guns or immigration.
MsFalconersCabanaBoy writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:43 PM
NeoConScum
It was one reason -- among many. There was also the resume inflation with regard to hunting that reminded me of the other flip-floppin' Massachusetts liberal who claimed to have hunted deer while crawling around on his belly. Next thing you know, he'll be windsurfing in a banana suit.

Then, when I looked at where he stood on all the important, conservative issues -- life, defense, and the Second Amendment -- it became abundantly clear that I was supporting a conservative who was a newcomer to the cause over a man who's been there all along, but with a few times in recent history where did things I didn't agree with. Nothing unforgivable, but enough to turn me off.

It's been a gradual shift, but the MLK bit put the icing on the cake.
Drex Davis writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:39 PM
Why is McCain popular among democrats?
Because, for all intents, he is one.

He's such a democrat that even Lieberman endorses him - the former candidate for VP of the US as a DEMOCRAT!

End of story.
bovertine writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:39 PM
Patrick must be pee-in his pants
out of fear for reprobate Rudy. As I've said, and I'll repeat, I don't support McCain, and it is looking more like I will vote for Mitt - if nothing else to possibly stop Rudy. But for a flagrant Rudy supporter like Patrick to criticize McCain on the life issue is ridiculous. Rudy is pro choice. Stem cells research is a given to Rudy. He said during this campaign that abortion was a guaranteed liberty and should be funded, although possibly not at the federal leve. He voted for Mario Cuomo and supported Clinton's veto ofthe partial birth abortion ban. He refuses to say if RvW is bad law and says his idea of a strict constructionist could vote either way on Roe. And don't believe this Hewit garbage about the only thing that matters is the courts. He didn't say that unitl we started getting these pro choice candidates. Anybody who knows anything about the life issue knows about the Mexico City policy, the Hyde Amendment, the bully pulpit, justice and HHS policies, not to mention that we have no idea what kind of cockamamie legislation a possible Dem controlled congress might vote out. This type of hting is what Hewitt said to give us the disaster in California that is Arnold who is declaring a fiscla emergency next week after running up an 18 billion dollar deficit. Tax hikes are coming. And part of htis deficit is an Arnold supported 3 billion dollar stem cell project. Hopefully the real Republican's in our legislature can stop the tax hikes.
Drex Davis writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:36 PM
Riiiiiiiiiight
MsFalconersCabanaBoy writes:
"Looks like Mitt's foundation is shaking.
I was a Mitt guy, up until mid-November. Part of what sent me over to McCain was the nearly lustful love letter Hugh wrote following Romney's speech on religion."

I'm calling horsepuckey on you.

A pundit fawns over a candidate, and, that's it, the last straw, You're no longer supporting him.

Riiiiiiight.

Nice try, McCain supporter!
patrick writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:31 PM
For the record
I really have to laugh at the suggestion that I am somehow a Mitt shill.

I've been on the record for a while as a Rudy partisan, though I've called into question his strategy of letting McCain run away with NH. Other than that, you'll see I've called balls and strikes on every GOP candidate, dishing out more than my fair share of good and bad reviews of Mitt, Rudy, Huck, Fred, etc.

Also, if I'm a Mitt guy, why have I had comparatively little to say about Huckabee in Iowa?

On McCain, I just happen to be part of the two thirds of the conservative blogosphere who would rather not see him as the nominee.
NeoConScum writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:18 PM
CabanaBoy...So, Hugh's Effusive About
Mitt and, therefore, you switch your allegiance to McCain? Boy, there's a REASON for ya! Good, independent, critical thinking & reasoning there, Bucko. Whew.
Dan writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:18 PM
Patrick = Hugh's waterboy
Just stop it Patrick. You're embarassing yourself. Just like Hugh Hewitt, you are losing all credibility in your relentless and slavish worshipping of and propagandizing for Mitt Romney.

Let me ask you, did you get this garbage directly from the Romney campaign and post it verbatim? Because Dan Bartlett from the White House said that Hugh Hewitt does that with the stuff that he gives him:
http://www.texasmonthly.com/2008-01-01/talks-2.php
"They regurgitate exactly and put up on their blogs what you said to them."

On another note - why have you and Hugh shifted strategies? First, your strategy was to try to claim that flip-flopping was a high virtue; something to be praised; evidence of maturity, blah blah. When nobody bought that tripe, then you and Hugh both shifted to branding the OTHER candidates as flip-floppers.

Your act has grown tiresome. It grew tiresome months ago. Just rest assured that John McCain will be having a hearty laugh at your expense on election night in New Hampshire.
Elderscapes writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:07 PM
McCain --

Yesterday I read several articles on his youth, his family background, and testimonies concerning his 5 yrs as a POW.

After reading this, I now know why I've never trusted the man. He is totally obsessed with his own self-worth.

I hope conservatives remember his record as a senator. Let him show his true colors and run as a 3rd party candidate or as Hillary's VP.

He's a hypocrite and a flagrant liar.
Spidey writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:06 PM
Great Find
and it really reinforces what real conservatives already know about him. He's openly bragged about reaching across party lines if he's elected POTUS. This should be enough to send and republican screaming for the exits....I just said the other day that if McCain was the nom him and Hillary would have nothing to argue about.......The immigration discussion would be over in 5 minutes as soon as both agree to "comprehensive reform" Mccain would kill republican turnout.Republicans need somebody that will stick up for THEIR issues and McCain wouldn't...He's very lukewarm on abortion and gay marriage.......he's deal cutter.........he loves the aggrandizement of being loved by both sides....the same as Huck........Both these guys are running on a very thin slice of the republican party..not enough to get a colalition.....Mitt's corny 3 legged stool(I always thought this would be a hoot at a gay party)at least addresses the need to pull all conservatives together.

I keep telling myself to relax and trust in other people who think with their logical side of the brain and not the emotional..
mcfritz writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:06 PM
Off-the record tax increases.
I would like to learn more about McCain's off the record remarks. According to AFT, McCain has said off the record he will raise taxes.

http://www.atr.org/content/html/mccainvotingrecord.html
MsFalconersCabanaBoy writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:05 PM
Looks like Mitt's foundation is shaking.
I was a Mitt guy, up until mid-November. Part of what sent me over to McCain was the nearly lustful love letter Hugh wrote following Romney's speech on religion. I can understand lavishing praise on a good speech. But, the genuflecting hagiography Hugh rolled out for that speech was just off-putting and, to me, a sign that there was some weakness in Romney's campaign for which Hugh felt obligated to compensate.
mcfritz writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:02 PM
Americans for Tax Reform Timeline
ATR has a good timeline of the shifts on fiscal policy for McCain. Given the recession in 2000 (Mankiw), the attacks on September 11th, and the continued uncertainty and recessionary pressure of 2003, I question the judgment of McCain's fiscal arguments.
LloydG writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 8:00 PM
But wait..
I thought people could change and we shouldn't complain when people get more conservative. This isn't flip flopping. It's just flipping right? I mean, if consistency mattered we wouldn't be voting for Romney, right?
Doug writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 7:57 PM
Honor McCain for many reasons!
But, in my opinion, none of those reasons include Senator McCain's stance on immigration, border security, or campaign financing! Senator McCain's Navy record is without a doubt excellent. The Senator's support for the GWOT is fairly consistent given his attitude towards the President. And, his support for our troops is noble and true.

However, the Senator is not a social conservative, not a fiscal conservative, and in some ways,not a national security conservative. I would not support the Senator's campaign for the nomination. However I will support the GOP's actual nominee all the way.
PatsFanDon writes: Sunday, December, 30, 2007 7:42 PM
Ruffini does Hugh's dirty work again
Here we go again.

Hugh takes a break and asks his boy, Ruffini, to step in and attack McCain.

C'mon, Patrick and Hugh, give it a rest already.

Mitt is tanking b/c people are finally realizing what a phoney Mitt really is.

All the money in the world (and Willard has spent a boatload) won't be able to save Mitt at this point.
Sign Up to Post Your Comments Sign Up to Post Your Comments
Please take a few seconds to sign up, then you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, create your own blog and more! If you are already registered, click here.
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.
 


Your Blog Postings:
Last updated 38 Minutes 52 Seconds Ago
Last updated 57 Minutes 12 Seconds Ago
Last updated 1 Hours 9 Minutes 51 Seconds Ago
Last updated 2 Hours 40 Minutes 2 Seconds Ago
Last updated 3 Hours 3 Minutes 25 Seconds Ago
 

Archives of our Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs

Blog Search



Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Townhall Blogs
Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Columns Columns
Your Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Your Blogs
By Month
 December 2009
 November 2009
 October 2009
 September 2009
 August 2009
 July 2009
 June 2009
 May 2009
 April 2009
 March 2009
 February 2009
 January 2009
 December 2008
 November 2008
 October 2008
 September 2008
 August 2008
 July 2008
By Issue
 A Culture of Life
 Budget & Government
 Campaigns & Elections
 Education
 Energy & Environment
 Faith & Family
 Foreign Affairs
 Health Care
 Immigration
 Jobs & Economy
 Judges & Courts
 Media & Culture
 Property Rights
 Safety & Security
 Science & Technology
 Second Amendment
 Social Security
 Tax Relief
Advertisement

Comments Comments

Munck
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By NOTW
axe,
 Re: This Christmas, 78% of Americans Identify as Christian
  By Crispian
NOTW 1:51 AM
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By Bob Munck
Munck
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By NOTW
arch
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By NOTW
Moronic Design
 Re: This Christmas, 78% of Americans Identify as Christian
  By Bob Munck
NOTW 1:19 AM
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By Bob Munck
NOTW
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By arch
mike (and arch).
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By NOTW
Mike
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By arch
Kevin
 Re: Early Morning God Thought
  By killer
Patriotic Chicagolander 9:11 AM
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By Bob Munck
cottoneyed
 Re: This Christmas, 78% of Americans Identify as Christian
  By mike
arch
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By mike
Mike Take heed!
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By arch
cottoneyed
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By mike
One more thing, Mike,
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By cottoneyed
Mike, he brings
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By cottoneyed
Why is it?
 Re: Authorities Say Terrorism To Blame For Christmas Plane Bombing In Detroit
  By arch
Mike, I've been posting here for
 Re: This Christmas, 78% of Americans Identify as Christian
  By cottoneyed

The Latest on Town HallThe Latest on Town Hall


Blog Roll Blog Roll