Saturday, May 24, 2008
|
|
There Will Be Blood ...
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
10:40 AM
|
John McCain has achieved his goal: The NYT editorial page today congratulates him for sacking Hagee and Parsley. Of course, I see this as a continuation of a disturbing trend: McCain is attempting to make friends of his enemies by making enemies of his friends.
Here are a few reasons I think this is a mistake:
1. McCain is encouraging investigation: McCain's recent lobbyist -- and pastor purges -- create an environment that rewards his opponents for continuing to demand McCain oust his friends. There are certainly dozens of McCain operatives, advisers, or staffers who currently work on his campaign, who also are involved with 527s or lobbying, at some level. McCain has shown his enemies that their inquiries will produce results, and what gets rewarded gets accomplished. McCain has also essentially conceded that he is responsible for the comments made by anyone who has endorsed him in the past. If I were an Obama supporter or operative, I would be pouring through the comments and writings of everyone who has endorsed McCain. This, of course, will lead McCain to purge more conservatives -- which will continue to drive a wedge between McCain and his conservative base (assuming he has any conservative base left).
2. Real votes are at stake: Rev. Rod Parsley is a prime example of how McCain's purges could have real electoral consequences. Everyone knows Ohio is the swing state, and it just so happens that Parsley's church is a veritable get-out-the-vote organization. Couple McCain's Parsley purge with his recently condemning a popular Ohio radio host who mentioned Obama's middle name -- and all of a sudden you have a real base problem in Ohio. And oh yeah, Rob Portman won't help you there, either (and if you think he will be enough to appease cultural conservatives, that shows you're out-of-touch with conservatives ...)
3. It strikes me that all McCain's concessions are to the Left (this includes sacking the consultant who headed up his conservative outreach for the primary). Fair enough. If you want to oust anyone who has said or done controversial things, conservatives should expect reciprocity. What about Juan Hernandez? Don't you think it's time to "denounce" him? Note: I think a lot of conservatives forgave McCain for making the infamous "agents of intolerance" remark back in 2000, because it was assumed that McCain was justifiably angry about the push-polling that had been conducted against him in South Carolina. But now it's starting to look like that was the real McCain.
... My belief is that politicians tend to follow the path of least resistance. They operate based on rewards and punishment. So long as appeasing the Left gets McCain ahead, he will do just that. For this reason, it is vital that conservatives hold him accountable and keep him balanced. Conservatives should expect a good Veep pick (not Lindsay Graham, not Crist, etc.) -- as well as for McCain to get rid of controversial influences on the Left, such as the aforementioned Juan Hernandez. Failure to adhere to these minimum requests may have real consequences.
|
|
Conservatives. McCain has slapped and bitten us too far to often for us to trust him about anything he says or does.
I am an Elected Delegate to my states Republican Convention and there are thousands of us state wide who will not support or vote for McCain. We are putting our Money, Time and Work into our Senators Re-Election, R-Congressmen Re-Election and State, County and Local Races. The Presidential Race is already over for us.
We have to keep 44-45 R-Senators to stop Cloture of legislation such as McCain Feingold, McCain Kennedy, McCain Lieberman... so these disasters of legislation can never voted on. If legislation never gets the the President, Presidential Choice does not matter.
Sorry to tell you the Presidential race is already over for many of the Fiscal and Social Conservatives but the National Republican Leadership has already thrown us under the bus and the bus tires are going flat, they just think the road is the problem not their transport vehicle. |
|
|
Why is anyone surprised at any of this. Juan Insane has gotten away with one of the biggest lies in political history. His candidacy for the White House was doomed after the amnesty fiasco last spring. He rescued it by saying at every campaign event that he had gotten message. The American people want the bordered secured and immigration laws enforced. He was asked several times about his support for amnesty and we he do it again and he always replied, "it won't come again. It is a dead issue. In fact he was so convincing on the subject exit polls in New Hamphsire showed voters thought he was the toughest on border issues. Now that he has the nomination the fraud is over. Amnesty will be on of the first things on his agenda!!! The man is a shameless liar!! Any conservative that cares about the sovereignty of this country and the old conservative principle, "the rule of law" should throw this idiot over the side. Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin are both good alternatives. If the GOP wants to come back as a conservative party Juan Insane needs to be defeated. He doesn't care about the GOP or Conservatives. Remember, he almost bolted the GOP in 2001-02 and was very close to becoming Kerry's VP in 2004. |
|
|
Being on Team McCain is like playing Russian Roulette. The longer you play, the worse it gets. Nothing to look forward to. He is the opposite end of the spectrum from Bush's cronyism. McCain is stuck in the wrong party. He never boots anyone that offends conservatives (Juan Hernandez e.g.), just liberals. It's like his game plan for everything is to get everyone on board in the beginning and then begin throwing people out for political gain. He did the same thing assembling his campaign team when he tried to monopolize all of the big name operatives before he went back to carrying his own bags when his failing campaign went broke. You know the saying, if you can't manage your election campaign, you can't manage the nation either. Should he win, take note. This could be how he runs his administration too. |
|
McCain's "vetting" of "Lobby" Staffers- Clinton's "Racist" Geraldine Ferrero-
Obama's "Typical White" GrandMother-
On and On--The Blood in the water is a direct result of the "I am a Victim of Somebody not like me!" and I want vengence.
We no longer work together for the betterment of This Nation, it is now about the World-over most of which we have no control.
We can only control ourselves. I cannot change the thinking of an Abortion Supporter and they will not change mine. Same is true for Global Warming, 2nd Ammendment, Illegal Immigrants... and to think "Talk" will change my mind is truely naive. Hence "Talk" with Iran will change their minds--sure it will.
Sadly our National Leaders, elected and appointed, have lost direction on what is best for this Nation. They live in an Ivory Tower world and have no idea what is below them (Elites) and little do they care. So we the voters are left with no acceptable choice but to put the least-worst choice in office, but I do not have to work for or send money to them to support them. |
|
|
I am heartened to see you sticking up for conservatives these days. Jonathan Garthwaite seems to be with us whole hog too. It is just so much easier to be consistent when we stand for something. I just can't get excited behind campaigning for the illusive fog that McCain seems to represent. "Yay uniform!" "Vote McCain because...well...never mind! Just because!" |
|
|
Could it be that McCain knows he can't win and is simply blocking for the Dems? Is he going to get appointed by Obama to something? High Priest of Global Warming? Border Enforcement Czar? |
|
|
Anyone else notice that he looks like he could be Don Quixote's son? Will be attacking our wind turbines in Desert Hot Springs? |
|
We the People of the United States of America have the right to have our borders and our laws respected and enforced.
Citizens of other countries illegally in our country have no right to demand anything from our government. They most certainly have the right to petition the governments of their home countries for change if they are unhappy with their home country. If they want to be Americans, we have a path to citizenship, more generous than any other nation, and it starts in their home country.
We need to insist on the equal protection, application and enforcement of the law or devolve into anarchy. Our Republic only functions if everyone follows the same rules. We should not change the laws to accomodate those breaking them.
If America annouces to the world "We can't stop you, so come on in" with another amnesty, the deluge will be overwhelming. If 3,000 a day didn't get your attention, then wait until it's 10,000 a day. We cannot sustain this influx and survive as a nation. We must speak up and speak to each other about this and not let false claims of racism or bigotry be used to intimidate us into silent assent. America is not Congress' to give away. America belongs to We the People. Speak to your neighbors, speak to your coworkers, but please speak up to your Congressmen and Senators. It's O.K. for us to enforce our laws, no really, it is.
Someone please tell Sen. McCain.
|
|
|
Has become Sen. McBackstabber. He lied his way through the primaries, fooling enough people that he had heard them about amnesty to gain the nomination. I knew he was lying the whole time. If you had parsed his words, you could have seen it, too. |
|
|
about conservatives at this point. He probably does not need them to get elected, as he should get lots of independents and "reagen democrats." The conservatives spent so much time bashing McCain and trying to prop up the pseaudo-conservative Romney during the primaries, that one can hardly expect McCain to reach out to conservatives now. |
|
"McCain has also essentially conceded that he is responsible for the comments made by anyone who has endorsed him in the past."
Let's hope he doesn't get the OJ endorsement. We already saw what the unsolicited Hamas endorsement did for Obama. Two can play that game. |
|
That's the ticket I see coming. What the RNC doesn't see coming is the inevitable trainwreck they have created. Importing voters for the socialists is as stupid as it gets.
GOP-RIP |
|
|
Why is anyone surprised at any of this?? Juan Insane has gotten away with one of the biggest lies in political history. His candidacy for the White House was doomed after the amnesty fiasco last spring. He rescued it by saying at every campaign event that he had gotten the message. The American people want the borders secured and immigration laws enforced. He was asked several times about his support for amnesty and would he do it again and he always replied, "it won't come again. It is a dead issue. In fact he was so convincing on the subject exit polls in New Hampshire showed voters thought he was the toughest on border issues. Now that he has the nomination the fraud is over. Amnesty will be one of the first things on his agenda!!! The man is a shameless liar!! Any conservative that cares about the sovereignty of this country and that old conservative principle, "the rule of law" should throw this idiot over the side. Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin are both good alternatives. If the GOP wants to come back as a conservative party Juan Insane needs to be defeated. He doesn't care about the GOP or Conservatives. Remember he almost bolted the GOP in 2001-02 and was very close to becoming Kerry's VP in 2004. |
|
Here's an important piece of advice: If it looks like it's going to be McCain/Palin anyway (and that should be a "no brainer" for Team McCain), McCain should announce NOW or VERY SOON, rather than later towards the convention. There's currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dems are likely aware of the Palin phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows -- even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick -- selecting Palin will be portrayed by Dems/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (overshawdoing Palin's own remarkable assets), rather than McCain taking the lead on this. Selecting Palin now or early (contrary to the punditocracy) will mean McCain will be seen as driving the course of this campaign overwhelmingly, and the DEMS will be seen as merely reacting. And, there's absoultely no down-side to this because even if Hillary is a no-go as VP for Obama, the GOP gains by acting early. McCain the maverick. Palin the maverick. Do it now!
There's no reason, and actually substantial negative, in McCain waiting to see what the Dems do first insofar as his picking Palin as VP, because, no matter who Obama picks, Palin is by far (and I mean far) the best pick for McCain and the GOP, especially in this time of GOP woes. The GOP can be seen as the party of real 'change' (albeit I hate that mantra, change, change, bla bla), while not really having to change from GOP core conservative values, which Palin more than represents.
In light of the current oil/energy situation, as well as the disaffected female Hillary voters situation, and growing focus on McCain's age and health, Palin is more than perfect -- now.
(Perhaps Team McCain is already on to this.)
|
|
|
Personally, I hope all the actual conservatives, Palin, Jindal, etc. stay far from this toxic ticket as they can. Gop Titanic is going down in November, let's not waste good talent. Let him take Grahamnesty or Leiberman down with him. |
|
|
The Republican party is no longer needed. |
|
Matt Lewis makes a great point. Why is McCain denouncing Hagee but not Hernandez?
Juan Hernandez has the same kind of relationship with McCain's campaign that John Hagee does. Both endorsed him without his seeking their endorsement. Neither man is close to McCain.
So why would McCain not worry about the criticism from the right about Hernandez, but on the other hand go out of his way to denounce John Hagee because the left demands it? |
|
|
McCain most certainly sought out the endorsements of Hagee, Parsley and as many tele-evangelists as he could. He didn't have to seek out Juan Hernandez' endorsement. He is a senior campaign staff member and can be looked at as the co-president for Hispanic relations. I would be surprised if McCain and Hernandez were not close friends at this point. |
|
When I heard the McCain campaign Hispanic Outreach director was none other than Smiling Juan Hernandez, I knew John McCain has heard nothing we have had to say.
Smiling Juan Hernadez
We know who he is, we know his loyalties are to Mexico, we know he wants to erase our borders and immigration laws.
JOHN MCCAIN, YOU NEED A NEW HEARING AID
Smiling Juan Hernandez
In case you don't know him, he used to work for the Mexican govt., lately he has been shilling for "rights" for illegal aliens in this country. He has said he wants Mexicans to remain Mexicans even if they are living here. His loyalties are to Mexico, not U.S.
Questions for illegal alien apologists like John McCain:
Why does The National Council of the Race (la raza in spanish) and the Chamber of Commerce get to negotiate a "Comprehensive Shafting of The American Citizens" behind closed doors? Since when does an organization representing foreign nationals breaking our laws get to rewrite our immigration laws to suit the lawbreakers? Isn't this akin to allowing NAMBLA to rewrite our laws regarding child predators? Or allowing organized crime syndicates to rewrite racketeering, gambling, prostitution, and extortion laws?
We The People are being told by our representatives that we should sit down and shut up while they invite in the entire world. We The People should get some say in this matter. Another amnesty will set off a stampede like we have never seen before. There is not much time to save our country. All the power and money are on the side of shoving this amnesty down our throats. The RNC wants an amnesty candidate, don't vote for one. |
|
I have not been fan of John McCain as a senator these past years since..., well, especially since 2000. But, I think he can possibly be a better President than he ever was as a Senator.
A Senator's political appeal is "issue based". A Presidents is more personal/bio and grand-theme based.
As a practical matter, McCain will be slightly to the right of Ford, but somewhat left of Reagan. Actually, that would make him right-of-center as Presidents go.
Obama's theme is change and hope. McCain's theme is experienced leadership in uncertain times --distinguishing him from both Bush and the Dem. candidates.
The Republican brand is under a dark cloud. And, nominating someone who is perceived to be simply a creation of Republican and conservative establishment organs, is a sure loser in the mind of politicos.
The theory that the McCain campaign is operating under is that he is *independent* (neither predictably liberal, conservative, or even centrist -- but best policy for America).
A number of conservatives agree withthe McCain strategy:
"Barbour touts moderate McCain"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2 0080429/NATION/129393134/1001
"McCain sets sights on moderates"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080502/NATION/9201 96823 |
|
|
The other theory, which isn't touted by establishment, inside the beltway, or Rep party leadership people is that it is McCain's personal leftist activities (Mc-Feingold etc-along with the Reps acting just like Dems) the last 8 years that has ruined the 'brand'. McCain has played no small part in making Republicans control of both houses ineffective. But you only hear this theory here at TH and other sites where the disgruntled embittered conservative troglodytes (including moi)'gripe'. |
|
|
Do you have any principles to go with your theories? |
|
|
|
Well, "my friends," I will always say that Republicans should stick with our nominee, (based on all those primaries and caucuses) and that person is McCain. On the other hand, I am very disappointed that McCain is keeping that odious Hernandez on the staff.
McCain's refusal to find a conservative Hispanic for that post coupled with his escalating (and transparent) desperation in courting anyone on either side of moderate is starting to wear me out!
Matt Lewis says: "If you want to oust anyone who has said or done controversial things, conservatives should expect reciprocity. What about Juan Hernandez?" I agree wholeheartedly!!
OUST HERNANDEZ, MY FRIEND!
|
|
I say this: The President elected this time will not protect Israel but will stand in silence while other nations tear Israel apart. Our President this time will not stand in defense of America, and will not even stand in defense of his own honor, rather he will stand in defense of his belief in appeasment, the easiest path, the belief that there is no evil in the world. So consumated in his belief of his own destined fear of failure, that without knowing he will stand (with God's guidance) in naked submission and acceptance to the the War that will soon follow. When the war comes The United States will do nothing but watch Israel being destroyed in the belief that her destuction will bring peace to the world. He will not understand that Israel, in a divinely guided light, did give hope to the Earth, in freedom, in love, in loving your enemies. A belief that has spawned America, and countless other countries in the belief that freedom is from God, an inaleinable right to love your son, your wife, your family, and to see them prosper. A right held so precious in the hearts of men for centuries.
It is not in Ill will that I speak of this. I love this country, but I understand divine providence and what is foretold. |
|
|
This possible dire situation also bothers me.I cannot understand why the Jewish population votes predominantly liberal sure Israel would not want the US to be weak on terrorism know who hamas wants to win.Who does Israel want to be pres. ? |
|
I'm from Cincinnati, Ohio; I'll bite on #2.
McCain was ABSOLUTELY correct to chastise the radio personality mentioned (Bill Cunningham). I saw the appearance on TV, and it was the most classless thing I've ever seen. Besides, Cunningham is just some loudmouth who gets an audience by saying outrageous things. In that case, McCain did it on the spot, so his conduct and timing were appropriate. I can't see a lost vote from it.
With Parsons, I never heard of the guy until two months ago when his name began being whispered. He's expressed some anti-muslim sentiments and some anti-gay sentiments (going beyond the act to the people). I may be wrong about the gay remarks. Whatever the case, I'll never understand why politicians seek endorsements from crazy pastors. Meet with vetted religious figures, make nice, then get the heck out. The symbolism of the meeting should be enough. I can't say for sure what effect that will have on Ohio voter turnout. But Ohio had its primary before we got a good look at Jeremiah Wright. And I can't see Ohio as an Obama state after that. Get someone to start running Wright ads before and after the DNC convention. That'll solve that problem.
|
|
|
Whether or not Cunningham's statements were inappropriate, McCain's staff KNEW what Cunningham was about and allowed him to do the intro anyway. THAT is what makes McCain so despicable. He sets people up. Team McCain is either the laziest, most incompetent bunch ever or they are simply duplicitous. I believe the latter or even both. |
|
Cuniingham was a loudmouth, but he did nothing despicable. It's just that McCain is very quick tomm give in to the media everytime they point their fingers at him. Thus Cunningham, the NC GOP ad, and now poor John Hagee. We'll see more of this yet. It's McCain's way of running an honorable campaign; throwing his own under the bus so the media won't get mad.
Meanwhile, Barack Hussein Osama is on a mission to find a running mate. My personal theory is that he'll finally choose Clinton. To find out why and to vote in my poll, go HERE:
http://romneyveepwatch.blogspot.com/
http://romneyveepwatch.blogspot.com/
http://romneyveepwatch.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
|
|
“He is going to need extraordinary participation of Republicans if Democrats continue to flock to the polls the way they have,” said Kris Kobach, the Republican Party leader from Kansas. “It’s critical that he use this period to generate enthusiasm from his base.”
McCain is just waiting for Stockholm Syndrome to set in. If you beat on people enough, they eventually rally enthusiastically to your cause. Strangest election campaign ever. |
|
We rank and file conservatives are being taken for granted by McCain. That's my problem with him. He thinks we'll just vote for him.
And we will. But we shouldn't have to dislike it so much. That's why I'm pushing for Romney as VP. Some planning for 2012.
http://romneyveepwatch.blogspot.com/
http://romneyveepwatch.blogspot.com/ |
|
That's EXACTLY what McScamnestys' problem is!.....Stockholm Syndrome! |
|
What's this "WE" stuff?
WE conservatives with principals will NOT vote for McScamnesty!....Nada,...Zip! |
|
|
I used to think that Obama/Hillary was inevitable but I now think there is no way Obama will do it because it makes no sense. First, Obama cannot claim the mantel of "agent of change" and split the ticket with the poster child of "inside Washington". Second, Hillary has no incentive to help him win because she can't wait until 2016. And third, Obama knows that Hillary will be a very disruptive VP. The Clintons simply don't play second fiddle to anyone and she will be busy creating her own power center trying to manipulate Obama. Won't happen. I think he's going to pick Mark Warner of Virginia which could turn that state blue for the first time in ages. |
|
|
McCain has always gotten along much better with liberals than conservatives. He's probably very happy with the fact he's all but destroyed the GOP. |
|
Because of John McCain's age I think the VP slot is important. He needs someone who understands economics, the regulatory environment and can do the math on the debt we carry and reduce the size of government.
It would be great if it is John Kasich. |
|
|
'PURGE' is exactly right. Like Uncle Joe Stalin. You never fail to amuse. Keep up the good work Comrade. The Order of Lenin may one day be yours. |
|
|
If we'd rather stick up for a bunch of right-wing whackjobs than what is right. McCain needs the independents to win this election, and being associated with guys like Hagee and Parsley is not going to bring those votes home. He's correctly distancing himself from these guys, and yet he's still being hammered by Matt Lewis on a daily basis. I guess we can just lump Matt in with wingnuts like Pasadena Phil who spend most of their time crticizing McCain everytime he sneezes. Sad, I thought Matt was a little better than that. |
|
Conservatives are NOT in trouble. Republicans are. Does that help you understand what is going on? There already is a party that addresses your needs to support a liberal like McCain. They are called Democrats. If you need instructions on how to join that party, send me an e-mail and I'll help you out. Based on your obvious reading comprehension problems (I defended McCain's decision to reject Hagee and Parsley you dope), you will do great over there.
Are you the guy with the pom-poms and little dress and pig-tails who leads the cheers for anyone wearing the Republican uniform? What kind of a nut does that make you? |
|
No matter how many bogus polls the elites throw out there, the rule of law is a winning issue. When they get to the bottom and ask these two question, Enforce immigration laws, or grant amnesty to illegals, the american people by 80-20 say enforce the law. Juan Insane is an out of touch elitist. He'd rather hang with the Editorial Board of the NY Times than rank and file Americans. He sees himself as above it all. He can't be bothered with the people who have seen their way of life destroyed by out of control illegal immigration. They just don't get it. Subsidized labor---ie---corporate welfare--- is all the elites in the GOP care about.
http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/05/that_fall_of_con servatism_essa.php |
|
|
why in the world are you so quick to dismiss Chritst as mcains best choice for vice president? it seems like an exceellent way to insur most of the Pro Christian vote. of course you wil alienate may jews, but even some of them would come.....whats that??? of Crist not christ. sorry |
|
|
I think we should load the Titanic with as many toxic Republicans as possible. I say we expand the veep role to about 100 veeps. The Titanic was a big ship. We have a big problem. Let's use one to solve the other. A combination made in heaven. Like chocolate and peanut butter. |
|
... their inquiries will produce results."
Yep.
How dumb is this guy? |
|
|
Typical liberal cheap shot tactic. A totally discredited argument that we have been fighting for ages and now McCain resurrects it for his own cynical self-deluded campaign. In the absence of guiding principles or ideas, just say anything. |
|
Neocons and Big Government Republicans have taken the party into a ditch. It will take several years to recover from this. I believe in Missle defense and defense spending but hate nationbuilding like Iraq. The GOP lost the 2006 election because of Iraq and corruption. Conservatives need to demand the following from the GOP.
1. Secure Borders
2. Control of spending
3. Abolishing all capital gains taxes.
4. Protecting the second amendment
5. Judicial appointments that support federalism
6. Support missle defense and strong security
7. Support tort reform
8. Fight for a balanced engery policy including drilling.
9. Keep the federal government out of Education and support block grants for the states
10. Oppose tax increases all the time.
What do you think? |
|
"GOP lost the 2006 election because of Iraq and corruption."
The two biggest issues at the time were illegal immigration and runaway government spending. The mismanagement of the Iraq war is a major irritant but voters still prefer the GOP solution than the Dem solution. We are now facing having to vote between an ultra-liberal candidate or and ultra-ultra- liberal candidate. When Republicans call Reagan conservatives as far, far, far right-wing nuts, something has gone haywire. We need to to get rid of the pod people who have snatched the GOP away from earthlings like us. |
|
In the recent campaign for the GOP nod, elites in the party pulled out all the stops to demonize the only real conservative in the race. Yes, Ron Paul was the only old school Republican running. What???? His foreign policy is straight out of the leftwing. No, it comes straight out of the finest traditions of the Republican party. Non interventionism. Putting the interests of the United States first.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=flJvKPM_Nf4
From Faux News, beltway libertarians, TownHall commentators, and Neocons all tried to smear Ron Paul as being a Nazi sympathizer. Some of the worst were right here at Townhall. It reminded me of 1964 when CBS news said Barry Goldwater was going to Bavaria to secretly meet with Nazis. The blog Red State even raised money for a primary challenger againt Ron Paul a few month ago. Paul won with 70 percent of the vote and the Democrats won't run anyone against him.
If the GOP and conservatives want to stage a comeback they would be well served to read Ron Paul's new book, "The Revolution A Manifesto"
Even former Bush family insider Doug Wead has seen the light
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/ron-pauls-best-you -tube-moment/#comments |
|
As a conservative voter I have been watching and listening to all that Senator McCain has been saying.
For a man who showed courage in the face of adversity during his time of imprisonment in Vietnam, I find lately a show of little courage in standing up to the media and the left on issues like the subject of this editorial.
I am at a stand still at this time on whether to vote for McCain or not as the other alternative is either Obama or Clinton winning the Presidency. That would disasterious for all the Country.
The question is; should I vote for McCain and figure he is a poor conservative candidate, but certainly better than not voting at all and thereby giving the point to Obama or Clinton?
Or sitting it out as protesting the candidacy of Senator McCain for President?
A President has to do what is best for the whole country but should at the minimum have the same basic fundamentals of his constituents.
I find these basic fundamentals lacking in Senator McCain.
Then again if you believe in God, all of this is really out of our hands. |
|
|
|
Let's remember that politcs is politics. I'd love to vote for someone who believed in all the things I believe. But this isn't religion, and sometimes you have to step on the gooey stuff (RINOS) to get the bigger things done (such as Iraq).
None of us is going to have much say if we abandon the Republican Party and start our own party. If it's possible for RINOs to infiltrate the Republican Party, it is equally possible for us to take it back. We just have to deal with McCain for a while... |
|
Hahaha....neither of those three parties will get ANY part of the GOP vote. They're out of the mainstream on a host of issues.
Like I say, instead of whining and complaining about how the GOP has been taken over, why don't we just wait to reconquer? |
|
JimP writes: 'PRO The other theory... ...is McCain's personal leftist activities... ...has ruined the 'brand'.'
ME: The problem with your theory is whether most of the complaints aganist McCain are ones which bother swing voters. McCain-Feingold primarily bothers people who are strongly on the right -- not independents of various sorts.
Podhoretz observes:
'There are two possible explanations for the decline in Republican involvement. The first, and most obvious, is fatalism—a sense of hopelessness about the upcoming election...
The second, and more telling, possibility is that there may simply be fewer Republicans in this presidential go-around. Just prior to the 2004 election, 37 percent of American voters, the highest number ever recorded, described themselves as Republican. Early polling in 2008 put the number of self-identified Republicans at about 25 percent.
True, the actual decline may turn out to be not quite so dramatic as this looks. People claim membership in a party, then drop the claim, then pick it up again. Thus, at the same early point in 2004, the Republican number was 28 percent, only to grow by one-third over the ten months leading up to the election. If one assumes the same growth in 2008, then 34 percent of American voters will identify themselves as Republicans in the final pre-election poll.
But that would still represent a loss since 2004 of every ninth Republican voter. The threat to the GOP is not that those seven million people will side with the Democrats, but that they will not go to the polls at all.'
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/special-p review-br--the-election--the-gop--and-iraq-11239 |
|
Podhoretz's comments in my previous post attempt to point out that Republicans have lost the advantage noted in the PEW research of 2004 trends:
====
'In some ways, the biggest difference between the latest Pew Research Center typology and those in the Clinton era concerns the groups in the middle of the political spectrum. During the 1990s, the typology groups in the center were not particularly partisan, but today they lean decidedly to the GOP.
The middle groups include Upbeats, relatively moderate voters who have positive views of their financial situation, government performance, business, and the state of the nation in general. They are generally well-educated and fairly engaged in political news. While most Upbeats do not formally identify with either political party, they voted for Bush by more than four-to-one last November.
A second, very different group of centrist voters, the Disaffecteds, is much less affluent and educated than the Upbeats. Consequently, they have a distinctly different outlook on life and political matters. They are deeply cynical about government and unsatisfied with their financial situation. Even so, Disaffecteds lean toward the Republican Party and, though many did not vote in the presidential election, most of those who did supported Bush's reelection.
In effect, Republicans have succeeded in attracting two types of swing voters who could not be more different. The common threads are a highly favorable opinion of President Bush personally and support for an aggressive military stance against potential enemies of the U.S.
A third group in the center, Bystanders, largely consign themselves to the political sidelines. This category of mostly young people, few of whom voted in 2004, has been included in all four of the Center's political typologies.'
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=943 |
|
Here is the problem I have with Podhoretz' claim that "the middle" is fleeing the GOP. Every poll taken of registered Republicans reveals that the party faithful are becoming more liberal. This because conservatives, who used to account for more than 60% of the GOP, are fleeing fast.
It is conservatives who are most upset at the GOP so isn't it obvious that Podhoretz is wrong? The GOP is shrinking because it has abandoned its base. The candidate is hardly inspiring and he is running without a message. That is why the Democratic turnout during the primaries was double that of the GOP turnout.
Whistling past the graveyard buddy. |
|
Pasadena Phil writes: 'Pro Here is the problem I have with Podhoretz' claim that "the middle" is fleeing the GOP. Every poll taken of registered Republicans reveals that the party faithful are becoming more liberal.'
ME: First, on that point what we would want to look at is whether the --"party faithful are becoming more liberal"-- means liberals are joining the Republican party, OR... whether these are longtime members who are personally turning "more liberal" (so to speak).
IOW, this may be a function of culture, viz. many of these more liberal Republicans are erstwhile conservatives. And, they have concluded that the conservative movement is exhausted and out of ideas. And, anyway, it was largely a smokescreen for powerplays.
Real American politics is all about K street lobbyists, and pork barrel projects for the home districts, and all this stuff about Russell Kirk, Milton Friedman, and overturning Roe is BullS**t for the ignornant masses.
So, people are saying, 'ya know, where someone is on the spectrum doesn't mean a hill of beans. What counts is whether they willing to do the hard work for improving America.'
Right now McCain is pursuing the voters that Hillary is pursuing. Those West Virginia (and the like in PA, OH, etc.) voters who had such a hard time with Obama. |
|
|
A large number of GOP voters WILL be voting for someone other than McCain this time around. There are more of us than you think. If there were a well-known solidly conservative choice running third party, they could win this year. As it stands, many disaffected conservatives will split their votes up between the Libertarian, Constitution and American Independent Party. Those are mostly votes that would have gone to the GOP if McCain wasn't the nominee. But the RNC had to have an amnesty candidate, so they will lose. |
|
JimP writes: 'McCain has played no small part in making Republicans control of both houses ineffective.'
ME: Well, it depends on what you're looking at. McCain, by all public perception, is an antidote to some of the GOP woes--a maverick hero-- like Jeff Flake in the House.
Podhoretz, again:
'There was, moreover, little or no evidence that the turn away from the seventeen incumbents who lost their House seats in 2006 was owing to anger over their voting record on spending, earmarks, Bush-era expansion of government, or immigration. Indeed, one of the House’s two most virulent opponents of immigration, J.D. Hayworth of Arizona, lost his own reelection bid by four points.
The problem with the conventional diagnoses of the GOP’s diminished condition is that they are themselves polemical in nature. Though they are offered to explain the disaster of 2006, their larger purpose is to direct the party’s future conduct, by aligning it more closely with the ideological predilections of the critics.'
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/special-p %20review-br--the-election--the-gop--and-iraq-11239
ME: The alternative case, essentially, is that Bush's competance on the war, which was a matter of some anguished ambivalence in the public mind (except on the left) until Katrina. Katrina proved what many hoped was not true. This administration is largely clueless.
And, then couple that with the lesser problems in congress, and the perception that the entire Republican party is clueless came to fruition in 2006. |
|
|
When I pointed out that the GOP faithful are becoming more liberal, my conclusion was based on the fact that Republican registrations declined from 38% in the November 2004 election to about 26% in November 2006. By subtraction (not addition of new liberal Republican registrants), the only way that can be true is that conservatives have been leaving the party in droves. It is not my opinion that the GOP is shrinking but an undisputed fact. The GOP hasn't been conservative party in more than 10 years. The amnesty debacle really was the last straw for many of us and we may never come back. It was no accident that the Dems drew twice as many voters as Reps and possibly more when you consider how many crossed over to vote for McCain. It is a stupid strategy and I believe it will doom them to minority status for the rest of my life at least if McCain wins. Having a Republican president is not the same as a party being in power. The GOP has abandoned even the pretense of having local organizations which is really hard to rebuild once they fall apart. It's not about the presidency in November but about Congress. It is important to defeat McCain and deny Obama a mandate. |
|
It helps if you have the Statler Brothers song 'Do you know you are my sunshine' in your head..ahem...la la la..
Chorus:
Do you know, do you know
about Back door John?
He's the one with the sombrero on!
Do you know, do you know
about Back-door John?
He's the one who'll cool the sun!
Back-door John he loves the human race!
He's going to put the bigots in their place!
Mexico, South America, even Pan-a-ma!
All aboard, we're all Americans now!
Do you know, do you know
about Back-door John?
He's the one with the sombrero on!
Do you know, do you know about Back-door John?
He's the one who'll cool the sun!
Back-door John, he fears no Hurr-i-cane!
Have no fear of the pouring rain!
A million here, a trillion there,
the planet is saved!
Just make sure you pay your share!
Do you know do you know,
about Back-door John?
He's the one with the Sombrero on!
Do you know, do you know about Back-door John?
He's the one who'll coooool theeee suuuuuuun!
Thank you, thank you very much. |
|
The behavior of this guy reminds me of both Voinovich and DeWine. Both were so worried about what people might think. Active collaboration with the liberals against their own party (DeWine on McCain's gang of 14, Voinovich on making the tax cuts temporary in 2003). DeWine got beat by about 10 points here in Ohio. I wonder if McCain and Voinovich will see the same fate.
Ohio is not a "feel good" state. The Dems here are out after blood, and getting McCain's blood is what they will be after. Wnen you look at some of our politicians like Marc Dann (just resigned because of sexual harassment) and our new secretary of state Jennifer Brunner (who went after voting machines and has much of the state going back to paper ballots which will benefit the vote cheaters ) you can understand that, to win Ohio, McCain will need every vote he can find. And those votes will NOT come from the moderate wing of any party. |
|
|
Respectfully, consider what Pasadena Phil has said. I think he summed it up perfectly. Simply put, even if the Indies and ModDems end up voting for McCain, if he loses an equal number of conservatives he doesn't come out ahead. I think he has already lost a majority of conservatives and is continuing to lose them. See John Hawkins post at Right Wing News. He just called Mac a "liar" and no longer intends to vote for him. I bet others have decided the same now with Mac's most recent under the bus episode. My guess is, that if McCain is elected in Nov, it will be because the Dems lost it. Not because McCain had a winning message. How many people does he have to discard and promises does McCain have to break before you or anyone else decide he can't be trusted and, therefore don't vote for him? Who do people hate more, their known enemy, or a traitor? I bet they hate the traitor more. |
|
Phil writes: 'Pro When I pointed out that the GOP faithful are becoming more liberal, my conclusion was based on the fact that Republican registrations declined from 38% in the November 2004 election to about 26% in November 2006.'
ME: Podhoretz addressed that. Go back to my post, or to the link:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/special-p %20review-br--the-election--the-gop--and-iraq-11239
JimP writes: 'Simply put, even if the Indies and ModDems end up voting for McCain, if he loses an equal number of conservatives he doesn't come out ahead.'
ME: Agreed. I don't agree with the part of it which is the stick-in-the-eye to conservatives. (Believe me, I'm consevative --but I don't wanna be simply ideological. I also wanna be intelligent.) What we know is that hardcore conservatives cannot muster more than approx. a third of the electorate.
So, if we put forth a candidate whose rationale is: 'I have an ACU rating of 100'. Indies and ModDems will say, 'big woo!, like give rat's toe about such things.' Rather, they will say, 'what are you freakin' righties gonna do to make America better?'
Phil writes: 'By subtraction (not addition of new liberal Republican registrants), the only way that can be true is that conservatives have been leaving the party in droves.'
ME: That is the dilemma, how do you hold conservtives, moderates, and attract indies & Reagan Democrats? The project may be well nigh impossible. Because, we conservatives become more and more ideologically purist since Reagan, and non_consevatives become more intolerant of us.
Solution? |
|
suckers who fall in line with the Liberals and then blame McCain.
If you vote for no one and vote only for Republicans in Congress, then you give this country to the Liberals as Commaner-in-Chief of our military and then what?????
You better take a look at yourself and ask if your in-action for voting for McCain will be worth the risk to this country to allow a Liberal who does not truely believe in any WHITE America. Just read his Books and then see who you believe should be President.
Your Library will have his books, just take the first step to find out who we are against and who we should vote for and why.
I can't believe what I read, and some of you say you are intelligent people and know about politics, well think why McCain does what he does and ask the Pastors if they agree with his decision and they will tell you they understand and still support him.
Wake Up.
Joy |
|
|
I agree with you about it being a dilemma. Personally, I am not, nor do I preceive those others who do not like or plan to vote for McCain, as more purist than when Reagan was in office. For me, and at least some others, McCain has accepted too many leftist premises and moved left instead of staying or moving right. He could have championed & initiated policies that were supply side economics, socially conservative, not restrictive of the first amendment, were pro-second amendment etc the last 8 years, but he did not. I understand your reasoning and agree there is validity to it. For me and many others McCain, the Reps have moved so far to the left that they are essentially Democrats and we choose to not vote for their policies. Accepting the left's premises was in vogue in the 1970's, but RR got elected. I do not accept the thinking that the voting public has really changed since then. |
|
"You better take a look at yourself and ask if your in-action for voting for McCain will be worth the risk to this country to allow a Liberal who does not truely believe in any WHITE America. Just read his Books and then see who you believe should be President."
And McCain does? Last year he, Kennedy and Bush were doing everything they could to allow all these illegal aliens from the third world to stay.
|
|
Written in large letters on the back window of my van is the following...
John Mccain
Hillary Clinton
B. Hussein Obama
None of the above
I have the "none of the above" box checked.(couldn't make the boxes here)
Every day, everywhere i go, people pull up beside me, honk and give me thumbs up. People stop me in parking lots to talk about what a joke this election is.
We're screwed, no matter who wins.
I see king lib is still pushing the Inexperienced racist/child pornographer '08 ticket.
If the best the dems can offer is a no experience, no accomplishments racist and the repubs can only offer a dem lite....i'll say it again...we're screwed. |
|
|
I'm afraid you are right on this point. The nation has collectively shot itself in the head. |
|
Some Republicans may end up voting for former Republican congressman Bob Barr, who won the Libertarian Presidential nomination yesterday.
I predicted long ago that there would be conservative choices on the ballot for those who can't stomach voting for the Democrat in Republican clothes, John McCain.
|
|
I am a Catholic-loving-Hagee! Sweetish!
I am a Catholic, loving Hagee, and I am going to vote McCain just
Just to Please your Sweetish,
brute-hearted-Sweeteeeee, Sweetish! |
|
Is a LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATE.
He is not a Republican or conservative.
He is among those ridiculous, employed by ACLU, TO AGITATE the Bush Administration's tactic in the War on Terror, and is great opponent of PATRIOT Act.
Also campaigning on the platform of "significant tax reduction, by shrinking our finincial and military footprints in Iraq."
We Wei, Mr. Barr, cannot run on the above plantform with the conservatives. |
|
Have you heard of "none of the above"? Barr is "none of the above". Don't confuse yourself by making more complicated. Just hold your nose and vote for the lesser of three evils. Remember Barr may not be perfect, but perfection is the enemy of the good.
You RINOs are going to be sorry you every threw those arguments at us. I plan on wearing them out.
|
|
|
Alex! I just hit double jeopardy!! Question: Who is the one candidate who is parading around as a conservative, yet is in favor of amnesty, against free speech, holds hands with Teddy, and is considered an egomaniac by everyone who knows him? |
|
JimP writes: 'PRO I agree with you about it being a dilemma. Personally, I am not, nor do I preceive those others who do not like or plan to vote for McCain, as more purist than when Reagan was in office.'
ME: Well... there are always puritans. I didn't remember this back in the day, but while doing some reading this cycle I ran across some commentary recounting that there were conservative activists back in the early-mid eighties blasting Reagan as sellout.
So, really, anyone who can manage to put together what it takes to get elected in this country is gonna encounter fire from purists.
Also, we would do well to understand that a candidate fits his times --especially a Presidential candidate. After Nixon lost the 1960 POTUS election, and then turned in 1962 and lost the Calif. Governor's race. Dick Nixon had become electoral poison that the public was not buying.
But, like a Phoenix from the ashes, in 1968 he was back! The times had changed and now called for such a man.
Just four years earlier the Republicans put forth the most purist candidate since... well, probably since Calvin Coolidge. And, Goldwater got his clock cleaned. No doubt there were poor deluded conservatives in the day who thought the Senator had more than a snowball's chance.
Moreover, there are currently wonderful legislators in the House with very high ACU ratings (some with even perfect 100s) but I suspect that most of them wouldn't be any better POTUS candidates than my terriers. It takes something more than the right positions to make a President. |
|
Phil writes: 'So...Pro Do you have any principles to go with your theories?'
ME: Yes. But, my principles are philosophical --hopefully not merely ideological. Alan Keyes has principles but he is also too enamoured with his ideology --and the sound of his own bloviating-- to ever get elected. (I say that as a 1996 & 2000 Keyes supporter.)
As a *principle*, I believe the lower the taxation the better for the economy --and for governing.
But, I'm not manaical about NEVER raising taxes --that is merely ideological --and stupid. (I wouldn't sign a no-tax pledge; thats pandering.) I don't know what the future might bring. I'm not a soothsayer.
Sometimes, the more intelligent thing (though not ideologically pure) might be to raise taxes one cycle, and the next lower them, or rebate the surplus. Balancing budgets, is also a principled policy. Not wanting to kick debt down the road to our posterity is also principled policy.
One cannot slash programs without providing a transition roadmap. People have to be weaned from government. The libertarian ideology is pie in the sky (as well as too social-Darwinist). No such person will ever be elected in our lifetimes. Nor, should they be. |
|
|
John McCain's campaign express will never get to its destination until it recognizes the suicidal support for amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, plus any number of legal immigrants who have no business being here. The train is rolling, all right, but in the wrong direction. Where'd I put that Aerosmith record? |
|
But remember we need his choice on Judges and he still is better than the other choices.
I cannot STAND the lies comming out of Obamas mouth he thinks everyone is stupid. I'v gotten so everytime I hear the word change I shudder. He still can't answer what kind of change.
And don't start me on the Clintons.
Mccain may not be the best but he's the best we can vote for, then start thinking about a new Party before 2012 (LOOK INTO THE CONSTITUTION PART). Their platform sounds great. |
|
It seems to me that if there has ever been a year that a third party candidate could actualy win, it's this year. If we had a solid, conservative and appealing candidate that he or she could sweep the conservative vote and let John McCain and the democratic candidate split the liberal and independent vote.
Dale Ingraham |
|
|
|