Saturday, January 12, 2008
|
|
Senator Santorum and Michael Gerson On John McCain (Bumped)
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
5:07 PM
|
UPDATE
I will leave this post at the top today because conservatives have to know that Senator McCain is the anti-conservative, and Rick Santorum's warning should be read by every Republican in every state yet to vote, and not just for the discussion of the McCain-Kennedy immigration fiasco highlighted below. I hope one or more of the FoxNews panel uses many of Senator Santorum's quotes in tonight's debate to put the issue of John McCain's anti-conservatism center on the table.
When Santorum says that "we’re looking at the media trying to make Barack Obama the president, and make John McCain the shill for him," and "I think they know that John McCain can’t win this election," he is exactly on target.
When Santorum says of McCain that on "the environment, he’s absolutely terrible. He buys into the complete left wing environmentalist movement in this country," he is speaking from Republican Caucus experience.
When Santorum says that about the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill that "John McCain was the guy who was working with Ted Kennedy to drive it down our throats, and lectured us repeatedly about how xenophobic we were, lectured us, us being the Republican conference, about how wrong we were on this, how we were on the wrong side of history," he was there, heard those lectures.
When Michael Gerson says that "I think the main policy problem John McCain has is that I don’t think there’s much evidence that he’s a convert on the pro-growth economic philosophy," and adds that "[w]hen he opposed the Bush tax cuts, it wasn’t just that there was not offsets, and not sufficient cuts," remember that Gerson was at George W. Bush's side through those battles. Gerson remembers that McCain "used our class warfare arguments, 'It’ll only benefit the top 1%' and other things," and concluded "I don’t think he buys the kind of supply side ideology that has really determined American economic policies the last 25 years, particularly under both Reagan and the current President Bush."
When you consider McCain, keep in mind Santorum's warning:
John McCain looks at things through the eyes, on these kind of domestic policy issues, looks at it through the eyes of the New York Times' editorial board, and accepts that predisposition that if you are not, if you stand for conservative principles, there’s some genetic defect.
ORIGINAL POST
Rick Santorum worked alongside John McCain for a dozen years in the Senate. Michael Gerson was at George W. Bush's side as the president worked Congress to pass tax cuts. I interviewed both today. The Santorum transcript is here; the Gerson transcript here.
Key excerpts from the Santorum interview on McCain's immigration views:
HH: Senator, welcome back. I was just…did you serve alongside Senator McCain for 12 years or longer?
RS: 12 years.
HH: So you know him well.
RS: I do.
HH: When you hear the media talking about him, and of course, he got Iraq right, and we’re all grateful for that, but he wasn’t the only Republican to get it right. Do you believe he’s sincerely changed on the immigration bill to where he understands the message that was delivered last summer?
RS: No.
HH: Why not?
RS: Well, I mean, because John McCain was the leader on the other side of the aisle. John McCain was the guy who was working with Ted Kennedy to drive it down our throats, and lectured us repeatedly about how xenophobic we were, lectured us, us being the Republican conference, about how wrong we were on this, how we were on the wrong side of history, and that you know, this is important for his…because having come from Arizona, knowing the strength of the Hispanic community, that we were going to be seen as racists, and he wasn’t going be part of that, that he was not a racist, and that if we were for tougher borders, it was a racist thing. Look, John McCain looks at things through the eyes, on these kind of domestic policy issues, looks at it through the eyes of the New York Times editorial board, and accepts that predisposition that if you are not, if you stand for conservative principles, there’s some genetic defect.
Santorum on McCain's ideology generally:
HH: Why can’t John McCain win this election?
RS: Well, number one, John McCain will not get the base of the Republican Party. I mean, there was a reason John McCain collapsed last year, and it’s because he was the frontrunner, and everybody in the Republican Party got a chance to look at him. And when they looked at him, they wait well, wait a minute, he’s not with us on almost all of the core issues of…on the economic side, he was against the President’s tax cuts, he was bad on immigration. On the environment, he’s absolutely terrible. He buys into the complete left wing environmentalist movement in this country. He is for bigger government on a whole laundry list of issues. He was…I mean, on medical care, I mean, he was for re-importation of drugs. I mean, you can go on down the list. I mean, this is a guy who on a lot of the core economic issues, is not even close to being a moderate, in my opinion. And then on the issue of, on social conservative issues, you point to me one time John McCain every took the floor of the United States Senate to talk about a social conservative issue. It never happened. I mean, this is a guy who says he believes in these things, but I can tell you, inside the room, when we were in these meetings, there was nobody who fought harder not to have these votes before the United States Senate on some of the most important social conservative issues, whether it’s marriage or abortion or the like. He always fought against us to even bring them up, because he was uncomfortable voting for them. So I mean, this is just not a guy I think in the end that washes with the mainstream of the Republican Party.
Gerson on McCain:
HH: Now Michael Gerson, you observed from the White House the battles over McCain-Feingold, and especially the Gang of 14. You know he voted against the Bush tax cuts. I admire John McCain a lot. I don’t like him at all. I mean, I really don’t like him. And as a result, you know, I will grudgingly throw in if he’s the nominee, but I don’t want to abandon my conservative Reagan-Bush coalition to John McCain’s leadership. Is this something you hear a lot from people?
MG: Well, it is on a couple of issues. I think the main policy problem John McCain has is that I don’t think there’s much evidence that he’s a convert on the pro-growth economic philosophy. When he opposed the Bush tax cuts, it wasn’t just that there was not offsets, and not sufficient cuts. He used our class warfare arguments, it’ll only benefit the top 1% and other things. I don’t think he buys the kind of supply side ideology that has really determined American economic policies the last 25 years, particularly under both Reagan and the current President Bush. And so that is, I think, the real problem. I mean, he has a soft spot for regulation in his record. He also is not really a supply-sider.
HH: And he’s also…do you think of him as an originalist? I won’t put words in your mouth, but the Gang of 14 struck me as being a non-originalist taking care of the perks of the Senate, as opposed to someone concerned with Constitutional processes, as did McCain-Feingold, which was a gagging of 1st Amendment rights.
MG: Yeah, no, I agree with that, but I don’t believe that McCain-Feingold is going to be a huge political issue. It certainly may be an ideological objection. But you know, McCain, though, to be fair, I believe on social policy and on judges has been conventionally conservative over the years. He has a pretty good record in the same way that Bob Dole had a pretty good record, not that he looks like he’s deeply engaged in these issues. I don’t know how much he cares about them. But he’s generally voted the right way.
|
|
Oddly enough, I suppose Santorum IS qualified to speak on losing.
Is Bennett now going to expound on gambling? Yikes! |
|
In March of this year the Boston Globe analyzed Mitt Romney’s economic record in Massachusetts:
On all key labor market measures, the state not only lagged behind the country as a whole, but often ranked at or near the bottom of the state distribution. Formal payroll employment in the state in 2006 was still 16,000 or 0.5 percent below its average level in 2002, the year immediately prior to the start of the Romney administration. Massachusetts ranked third lowest on this key job generation measure and would have ranked second lowest if Hurricane Katrina had not devastated the Louisiana economy. Manufacturing payroll employment throughout the nation declined by nearly 1.1 million or 7 percent between 2002 and 2006, but in Massachusetts it declined by more than 14 percent, the third worst record in the country.
They lost total jobs, ranking 3rd from the bottom:
While the number of employed people over age 16 in the United States rose by nearly 8 million, or close to 6 percent, between 2002 and 2006, the number of employed residents in the Commonwealth is estimated to have modestly declined by 8,500. Massachusetts was the only state to have failed to post any gain in its pool of employed residents. The aggregate number of people 16 and older either working or looking for work in Massachusetts fell over the Romney years.
http://www.eyeon08.com/2008/01/10/turnaround-artist-didnt-t urn-around-mass-job-growth/
MICHIGAN, YOU ARE NEXT.
And cottoneyed when did McCain vote against you and your family? |
|
|
voted against the interest's of conservative families like mine. |
|
|
The same guy who lied on Hugh's show telling us we had found those WMD's in Iraq. Nevermind they were dead shells from the Gulf War. |
|
Michael Medved unleashes on Mitt (again):
After spending more money than his major opponents combined, Romney appears more and more clearly unelectable, and a Saturday column by Gail Collins in the New York Times gives a clear explanation why. “Unfortunately, there’s something about Romney’s perfect grooming, his malleability and his gee-whiz aura that seems to really irritate both the other candidates and the voters,” she writes. “What bothers voters about Romney, as it turns out, is not his Mormonism but his inherent Mitt-ness.”
She’s right, of course. As I’ve said repeatedly over the last several weeks, the problem for Romney isn’t his faith, it’s his phoniness. It’s even worse to see that in-authenticity combined with an all-too-visible mean and nasty streak in going after his rivals.
http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/56375486-5a44-49eb -b0ff-7002afd5d0bf |
|
I Might Compromise My Principles and vote for the 1st Liberal-Republican that Invokes Reagans Name Truthfully - By Admitting "If Ronald Reagan Were Alive today...HE Wouldn't Vote For Me"
I Know ONE Candidate (2 counting Hunter or 2 1/2 Paul) who wouldn't be able to say that and be correct. Ron WOULD CONsider Each of The Three Before Making The Obvious Choice...Fred Thompson!
Only Fred Can Re-Unite The Party & Re-Ignite The Torch Of The Republican Revolution Again!
THAT IS exactly what the MSM & the Chattering Classes from inside the Beltway & New York ARE AFRAID Of!
No Surrender - No Compromise
That is the mantra Reaganites Should Be Endorsing
Now is NOT the Time to Burn the Conservative Planks of OUR Platform!
NOW IS the Time for the Conservatives in The Republican Party to Band Together & ELECT a President Of OUR Choosing!
Vote Conservative
Vote Your Principles
Vote Fred Thompson '08
Thompson/Hunter...Anyone?
W/O=
|
|
If Romney wins Michigan, he lives and has a chance to be the nominee. I do not see Romney doing that well in the Super Duper Tuesday states and definitely not sweeping the board. If he loses Michigan he is done for.
I think you are mistaking the Patriots for Mitt. They may be both from Massachusetts, but they are two very different teams. |
|
Sanitorium lost all credibility (right or left) when
he got beaten pretty handily by all the voters in PA. Yeah listen to him, he knows what Republicans should do! |
|
believe the Garden of Eden is in Missouri... Perhaps we can all vote on that, but before we do, why not get your John Boy to gather 7 Demos and 7 Repubs together.... decide to throw out filibustering on the issue in exchange for dismissing the issue all together...
McCain has got a conservative record on Judicial matters? Give us a break... Why do't we ask the Conservative District appointments that John Boy bargained away with his Gang of 14.... Guess you don't like to pay attention to the facts. |
|
"But you know, McCain, though, to be fair, I believe on social policy and on judges has been conventionally conservative over the years. He has a pretty good record... he’s generally voted the right way."
Ouch Hugh - how that must hurt your attempt to distort McCain's record. So on the war, social policy and the judiciary McCain is a conventional conservative with a good record who votes the RIGHT way. But McCain doesn't believe the Garden of Eden is in Missouri so I guess he's not your kind of conservative.
|
|
I listen to Rush with some regularity and he is NO FAN of Huck's.... You need to share the other 99% of the things that he has said about him.... Rush also will tell you that he and McCain are the two most liberal candidates in the Republican field.... AND, I guarantee you that he does not think that Huckabee has Reagonistic qualities..... He, in fact, thinks the guy is extremely shallow on Foreign Relations, Liberal on Fiscal poilies (tax and spend) and definitely on the wrong side of immigration.... and I think most Real Conservatives agree (even us Christians who do not believe we are being sacreligious for not liking the guy's politics)....
When Rush refers to the emotional ties between him and his supporters he is refering to a lack of ability on the part of many of them to objectively look at the guy's qualifications and what he stands for... I am personally starting to see that finally changing a little among the people I know who support him..... Thank goodness. |
|
Just got back from a nice dinner and enjoying some Football and Basketball... Some good games...
Just read some of the comments while I was gone and some of you guys really are sounding Desperate when it comes to wanting to disc Romney...
I'm telling you that we need a TRUE Conservative to win this race.... It doesn't have to be Romney (although I believe he has the best skills for what we need), it could be either Thompson or Giuliani as well.... we just need a CONSEVATIVE! |
|
Back to basics, guys!
I'm going to get a bumper sticker:
ANYBODY BUT HILLARY |
|
|
but I got so turned off by Hewitt's ad-nausium boosterism that I shut the door. |
|
Something Flip-Flop Fee-Fee Romney lacks.
[Wade 10:25 PM]"Get it through your head Romney isn't going to win and your running down of other candidates is only serving to divide the party."
Limbaugh, Rush. 4 January 2008. "A Discussion of Cultural Rot"
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_010408/content/ 01125113.guest.html
He [Huckabee] knows his audience. He's connected to them. I mean this is something that -- you know, I wish more politicians had the ability to connect. I really do.
I'm tired of politicians talking over people, at people. You gotta give him credit for this. He has managed to connect to his audience, and, just like the Drive-Bys, cannot separate you all from me because the Drive-Bys did not make me who I am, there's nobody that's going to be able to separate Huckabee from his audience, from his voters. That's going to have to happen on their own volition. I've learned this long ago. You just can't talk emotional ties away.
///////////////////
Rush admires Huck Reaganesque quality
Rush, in transcript of 7 January 2008
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_010708/content/ 01125112.guest.html.guest.html
I know the FairTax doesn't have a prayer, but Huckabee, when answering questions about this says, "Well, it may not have a prayer but it's never going to have a chance unless we have a president who can lead the American people and get it for them, because the American people get what they want, that's what he's saying," and I admire that, by the way. I admire people who are willing to talk to the American people over the heads of the media, over the heads of everybody else, and try to inspire them and so forth and get them to be educated and informed. Reagan had the ability to do this.
Huckabee for Communicator in Chief
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=6c43e6d4-839f-4c4b-adc 6-b34a0873cd25%40o6g2000hsd.googlegroups.com
|
|
You're looking at the '08 GOP nominee.
|
|
|
If Mitt wins Michigan no doubt Hugh will condemn having having Republican contests decided by Democrats and discredit the results. |
|
|
So you'd rather the Democrats win than support McCain. "Brand protection" trumps the war on terror. Thanks for clarifying your priorities. |
|
|
|
What explains Giuliani's slide into irrelevance? Fred Siegel, author of a Giuliani biography and an editor at City Journal, says the former mayor's fate is largely out of his control: "Rudy got caught in a windshear--the fall of Hillary, and the rise of Huckabee and McCain." In this view, Hillary Clinton's missteps in the Democratic race removed the chief rationale for Giuliani's candidacy--that he was the best candidate to face down the Clinton machine. Clinton was also Giuliani's chief foil on the campaign trail, providing the mayor with an opponent against whom he could rally Republicans who might otherwise have been wary of the thrice-married New Yorker
http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/0 14/584edbsw.asp
+ + + |
|
|
McCain Derangement Syndrome. Hugh has it. |
|
here you go:
In the AP interview, Santorum talked about things that are "antithetical to strong, healthy families" and he brought up a case pending before the Supreme Court dealing with a Texas law on sodomy.
"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery," Santorum said in the interview. "You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does."
At another point in the interview, Santorum said marriage is a bond between a man and a woman. "That's not to pick on homosexuality," he added. "It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be."
|
|
|
I guess the Daily Kos campaign for Romney is taking effect and working. So sad. |
|
Hugh:
Get it through your head Romney isn't going to win and your running down of other candidates is only serving to divide the party. For a supposed smart guy, you are acting incredibly foolishly. I think you have lost your mind over the fact that the party hasn't followed you. |
|
Just for you Huck/McVain supporters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faKzzgXVAv8
Enjoy!
|
|
Mitchell Research poll has Romney trailing McCain by only 1 point, 21-22. He had trailed by 6 points two days earlier.
Detroit Free Press has Romney up by 5 points, 27-22. Huck at 16.
Detroit News has McCain 27, Romney 26, Huck 19.
That's a lead and two statistical ties, to go along with the Ras tie and McCain's lead in ARG. The RCP average is an (insignificant) 0.6% lead for McCain.
Romney has done very well among voters who used Michigan's early voting option. 9% of poll respondents reported having already voted, and among these, Romney led McCain by a 3-1 ratio.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/in dex.html |
|
I thought that was a grinning cadaver from the Egyptian part of the cruise...
+ + + |
|
I am a McCain, not Huck supporter. I also support Fred and Rudy. I think Mitt is a loser who will lose his "home" state of Michigan. I want a winner for the GOP nomination. Mitt is not going to win.
Now back to football.
And PS to my friend SEEHAWK: my condolances. |
|
|
just look at the picture of him on the front page. He has the goofy smile that makes him look like a gremlin. |
|
|
Nahhhh. He won't slit his wrists, he'll just do another "Romney Rising" post. |
|
Santorum lost all credibility with conservatives from Pennsylvania when he supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey, by saying of Arlen: "He's with us when it counts."
That he is now excoriating McCain is an irony too rich to contemplate.
Santorum is nothing more than a Republican tool. They use him because the majority of conservatives believe, erroneously, that he is a genuine conservative. Sorry. Swing and a miss.
Those of us who saw the commercial where Santorum said of Arlen Specter: "He's with us when it counts" know the truth. Santorum is a pretender, a poseur, a fake, a fraud a charlaton. The fact that the Republican establishment, Santorum in particular, is attacking McCain just might make me take a second look at him. I had dismissed him out of hand due to his stance on the shamnesty bill and his support of McCain-Feingold. Now I'll have to take a second look. I'm guessing that wasn't the intent here. Job well done, boys. The stupid party strikes again. Keep it up. You'll eventually drive every real conservative out of the party.
|
|
|
Yeah, I have a personal vendetta, but you don't. Whatever, chump. I like Mitt well enough. A bit humorless, but he has other fine qualities. Like I said, give us Mitt. Gloria Allred could beat that guy.. |
|
John McCain clearly the best in GOP primary
- The State editorial board's GOP presidential primary endorsement
FOR SOUTH CAROLINA, and to some extent for the nation, the choice among Republican candidates for president has come down to two men.
First Rudy Giuliani, then Mitt Romney looked at political realities and fled the Palmetto State, deciding their priorities lay elsewhere. Fred Thompson seems to be running in this first-in-the-South primary just to say he did. Ron Paul keeps on being Ron Paul, former nominee of the Libertarian Party.
The two remaining contenders here happen to be the two strongest candidates — Mike Huckabee and John McCain.
[...]
Clearly, the best Republican candidate to lead our nation at this time is U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona. He has the necessary experience, not just in time served, but in the quality of understanding he exhibits across the board.
http://www.thestate.com/opinion/story/282466.html
+ + + |
|
... the Log Cabin Republicans (pro-homosexual marriage and anti-constitution)
... abortion providers (pro-abortion, pro-abortion as part of MassCare)
... the Kos activists
Mitt Romney. What do you want him to be? He'll be it for you, for yoru vote!
Romneyism kills (babies)!
+ + + |
|
Read why the Daily Kos want Dems to vote for Romney in Michigan! What do you think?
From Daily Kos
In 1972, Republican voters in Michigan decided to make a little mischief, crossing over to vote in the open Democratic primary and voting for segregationist Democrat George Wallace, seriously embarrassing the state’s Democrats. In fact, a third of the voters (PDF) in the Democratic primary were Republican crossover votes. In 1988, Republican voters again crossed over, helping Jesse Jackson win the Democratic primary, helping rack up big margins for Jackson in Republican precincts. (Michigan Republicans can clearly be counted on to practice the worst of racial politics.) In 1998, Republicans helped Jack Kevorkian’s lawyer — quack Geoffrey Feiger — win his Democratic primary, thus guaranteeing their hold on the governor’s mansion that year.
With a history of meddling in our primaries, why don’t we try and return the favor. Next Tuesday, January 15th, Michigan will hold its primary. Michigan Democrats should vote for Mitt Romney, because if Mitt wins, Democrats win.
READ MORE
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/democrats-for-romn ey
|
|
|
|
|
Please hide all his knives, scissors and razor blades the day of the Michigan primary and for some time afterwards. I fear after McCain beats Romney in Michigan and Romney's chances for the Republican nomination is all but done Hugh might try to slit his wrists. |
|
Hugh writes:
"I hope one or more of the FoxNews panel uses many of Senator Santorum's quotes in tonight's debate to put the issue of John McCain's anti-conservatism center on the table."
Is there a brand new Republican debate on Fox tonight? I can't find anything in the 'sphere about it. Over at Foxnews.com, the schedule entry says:
"The South Carolina Debate — As the GOP candidates gear up for the FOX debate things get serious and campaigns are on the line… Encore!"
http://www.foxnews.com/fnctv/
I ain't fancy, but I think "encore" means it's already been done. |
|
Watch and learn my friend.... (isn't that the venacular that John Boy likes to use? or maybe he likes to use other words like he did with Senator Cornyn in a meeting regarding his and Kennedy's conservative Immigration Bill. You know, the one that starts with an "F").... I really don't think JB can get 40% of the vote in a General Election.... Even if he could, he will do it without Conservative support.... A guaranteed loser and I would take all of that action that I could get...
He's a more liberaBob Dole incarnate. |
|
you write:
"poyman. You go guy!
Nothing would make me happier than to see your view prevail in the GOP. I hope that Mitt or Fred gets the nod. Huck or Guilani would be too much to hope for. I don't want to overreach. Here is to the continuing overreach by conservatives everywhere. Keep true to ideology."
surely you jest........however, we joke not when we speak of just how fantastically frightening it is, the thought of any one of your front runners; their platforms are from another planet. A planet not inhabited by organic based life form. So incredible are the ideas of yoru party----they could not be thought up by well paid Hollywood script writers------on second thought, perhaps by scabs brought in to keep the programs running.
Buffoon, we kid not about that stuff. It i ssimply too serious.
|
|
|
Nobody votes for the VP. He may help the ticket marginally but people never overlook the top of the ticket to vote for the VP. Liberals and Democrats may like him, but they will vote for their own in November. The base HATES McCain. |
|
|
Speak for yourself. In the CNN poll released yesterday, only 5% of Republicans said they would be "upset" if McCain were the nominee. This was the LOWEST for all the candidates. For Romney, 6% said they would be upset if he were the nominee. |
|
|
Is that we don't want him.... as a Presidential Nominee or as a VP nominee... Not because of his personality or due to some peronal vendetta (like you apparently have for Romney).... but because he is seriously flawed as a Republican candidate.... Call it "Brand Protection" for lack of a better term.... We will insist on a Conservative, or we simply won't support the candidate.... And,unfortunately that includes John Boy... |
|
Hugh asks Santorum why McCain cannot win the election. The ex-Senator replies: "Well, number one, John McCain will not get the base of the Republican Party." That all is circumvented by choosing a running mate who would be acceptable to the base. Easy enough to do, for crying out loud. And most Republicans will come back, as the spector of a Barack or Hillary Presidency draws nigh..
Look, as it is, you Reeps have your hands full this year. Al Sharpton could beat Mitt. But McCain draws independents. You're going to need them. Your party is deeply unpopular. All the energy is on the Democratic side.
Your advantages are that you have a nationwide distribution, your leadership knows how to win elections, and America is by nature a conservative country. But that may not do it in this cycle unless you guys are on your toes. If the Republican base does not demand more from its leadership than a standard issue, talk radio conservative like Mitt (who has flipped-flopped his way to those standard issue views, no less), your team is going to get its lips ripped off. If you refuse to see it, fine. Its your funeral. |
|
|
You are the ones who told us to go somewhere else to post. Sounds to me like you need to practice what you preach. |
|
|
Y'all have to get opposing views removed.... Sounds like a typical McCainenite and Huskster tactic... Take my comments out all you want, there are a gillian people who feel like I do... Those feelings are not going to go away. |
|
|
Now you are repeating posts... just like you know who. |
|
|
When did you get elected the spokesman of everyone? You should have said that my comments were OBJECTIVELY boring like your mentor would have. |
|
|
Your attacks on Hugh are boring to all of us.... go somehere else where people might care what you say... wait a minute, there might not be any place else. |
|
|
Your attacks on Hugh are boring to all of us.... go somehere else where people might care what you say... wait a minute, there might not be any place else. |
|
Hugh Hewitt has spent the last 2 weeks claiming that the pundits have no idea what they're talking about.
Now, in his efforts to destroy McCain, Hugh relies on ..... ::drum roll:: the opinions of pundits!!
Pundits like the loser, washed-up hack Rick Santorum.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - Hugh's dislike of McCain has nothing to do with political philosophy. NOTHING. If Hugh were the conservative purist that he claims to be, he'd be going after Romney as well for his million apostasies against conservatism.
I'm beginning to think maybe McCain stole Hugh's girlfriend in high school or something ... |
|
|
What does Huck pay you to be his Blog Warrior and to rip Hugh and Romney?? Whatever it is, it's too much cuz your effectiveness is pretty poor. |
|
Yesterday had Romney up by a little over one.
Today it's McCain up by 3.4.
Also: McCain +4 v. Clinton, -0.3 v. Obama
Romney -6.3 v Clinton, -16 v Obama
But...uh...Romney Rising! |
|
On when Townhall comes to its senses and lets Hugh Hewitt go.
Reposting something three times is a bit ridiculous... you sound like you are a part of a 527 group. |
|
So in response to Fred Thompson's criticisms, Mr Positive Huckabee goes negative. This is exactly what happened last time...Romney made ads looking at his record, and Huckabee makes a negative ad in response and shows it to the press.
Now Fred is showing Huckabee to be the economic liberal that he is, and Huckabee makes it personal.
I wonder if I should do the same thing JOE does against Romney...just post a ton of repetitiout blather in an effort to warn people about Huckabee. |
|
Y'all need to go and get a real life... Most of us who read Hugh's Blog agree with most of what he comes up with.... Conversely, everything that you guys come up with is offensive...
The Real Conservatives are NEVER going to support Huck or McCain... If the party as a whole (along with the Demos that get to vote in our primaries (rooted on by the MSM), decide to make one of them a nominee their will be mass migration from the party and I feel confident in guaranteeing a resounding defeat in the Fall against any Democrat nominee
Huck and McCain are very Liberal on some very important issues,and most republicans know that and will never support them... We can take any of the other three(Guiliani, Romney and Thompson) but NEVER HUCK OR McCAIN... John boy can give us all the "straight talk" he wants, but he will always, be lined up with folks that are NOT CONSERVATIVE on every issue except the war.... |
|
You want to trash McCain because he's no conservative (which I agree with) but you won't hold Mitt to the same standard? You should be ashamed of yourself!
McCain is most definately a anti-Conservative.
Guliani the same as above.
Romney very slightly better, but only by a hair.
Huckabee the same as above.
The only viable Conservative candidate is Fred, the rest of the field are nothing more than RINO's!!! |
|
Hugh,
I think you should promise that if Huck were to win the nomination that you would favor us with at least a couple of "Huckabee Rising" posts on your site. If you think that his getting the nomination is highly improbable, then you're safe in making such a promise, right...?
C'mon, Hugh. You've given us 100 Romney Risings. Can't you promise us one or two Huckabee Risings, especially since you think you'll never have to pay up? |
|
|
He's totally nuts. He's just gone crazy. I mean it. Does any think that maybe Hugh has become a bit unbalanced? What is wrong with him? I have lost all respect for him. I only listen to his show to see just how far this Romney lovefest can go (and in L.A. there is nothing else on at 3P. You can tell that Hugh's pundit guests can't believe what he spews to them... |
|
|
He's totally nuts. He's just gone crazy. I mean it. Does any think that maybe Hugh has become a bit unbalanced? What is wrong with him? I have lost all respect for him. I only listen to his show to see just how far this Romney lovefest can go (and in L.A. there is nothing else on at 3P. You can tell that Hugh's pundit guests can't believe what he spews to them... |
|
The more you post, the more the trolls squawk! You must be doing something right!
As for McCain .....
I don't care if he gets the endorsement of Jesus Christ and half the sand burrs on the Grand Strand. He's a pandering backstabber who uses his POW status as a crutch for credibility.
If the military is his "bag" -- why hasn't he done more for vets? He of all senators should have been demanding better care for injured soldiers.
When is he going to be asked why he's voted against vet healthcare funding six times???
My take on his waterboarding stance? He's a hypocrite -- his injuries occurred in a crash -- not from inhumane treatment. He sold out to the VC when they learned he was the son of an admiral. He wanted to be released, but was stopped by higher ranking POWs. He's the only POW who gained weight during captivity. Thousands upon thousands of men became heroes in VN ----- the overwhelming major of whom have never used their "heroic" service to gain acceptance.
Vote for McCain? When Huck's personal hell freezes over.
And if some of you trolls wanna hop on McVain's VN hero-cart -- I was there, too. And I don't claim to be anyone's hero.
|
|
....................TOUCHDOWN.......
......................35-17...
Great job, Packers.
signed,
a Giant's fan |
|
Does it strike anyone else as weird that Hewitt has to repost the same interviews thrice? That's two slots that could have been filled with fresh McCain-hatred. Couldn't he find anyone else on the right to trash McCain?
As he closes in on the nomination, increasingly the answer will be no. Only has-beens like Santorum, Bork and Gerson will have the freedom to take swipes at him. Everyone else will be angling for a job in the McCain administration.
Actually, I don't think McCain gets the nomination. But his chances are a lot better than Mitt's.
|
|
but that was until Rick Santorum told me not to. I tried to ignore Santorum the first time I heard him, and the second time, and the third time.
But by the 57th time this week that Hugh either played the Santorum comments on his show or put it yet again on his blog, it finally got to me. MCCAIN IS NO CONSERVATIVE!! HE CAN'T BE ALLOWED TO BEAT ROMNEY!!
I've been converted! |
|
....if all else fails, dredge up quotes from Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum.
What a joke.
Hugh, how long until your next "Romney Rising" post?? |
|
loopy ...Hugh's just gone loopy ! I am sure this post convinced no one when it was originally posted and will convince no one of anything now. I love how the Rombots are spinning the "just wait till the conservatives find out" spin. Could it possibly be that conservatives look at Mittens and see a phony conservative who is just saying ultra conservative things to get elected?
we aren't buying what you are selling Mittbots !
dirL |
|
Hugh must think the Pennsylvania loser's personal grudge against McCain is about 5000% more persuasive than it is. He plays that quote for every guest (though most just laugh it off). He seems to regard it like a magic anti-McCain talisman. Funny how fast Hugh ends the interview when Santorum mentions his problems with Romney.
And Phil, McCain has an 82% ACU lifetime rating. What is the minimum rating to be called conservative? |
|
|
I don't always agree with him, but he provides excellent insights and has a great sense of humor. I find his posts much more intellectually honest than Duane and Hugh's. |
|
I'm howlin......thanks for that.........btw, how 'bout that Brett Favre? As a lifelong Giant's fan, It's pretty neat to be able to recognize someone from another team----such as it is with Mr. Favre.
YeeeeeeeeeeHaaaaaaaaaaaaw, love to see him go to teh SuperBowl and kick a$$----especially if it is those cheaters from Boston. |
|
Here at Hugh Hewitt's website.
Have you gotten to the point yet where you don't actually type anything original, you just copy and paste from past posts?
If not, you're almost there, keep up the "good" work! |
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a winning ticket for me! Kerry/McCain almost became a reality in 2004. Of course, that doesn't count for the nutty McCainites and their "new conservatism". With their logic, McCain is a conservative because Hugh is a fool. Who can argue with such impeccable logic? These learned how to debate by watching "Wayne's World". |
|
MG: But you know, McCain, though, to be fair, I believe on social policy and on judges has been conventionally conservative over the years. He has a pretty good record in the same way that Bob Dole had a pretty good record, not that he looks like he’s deeply engaged in these issues. I don’t know how much he cares about them. But he’s generally voted the right way.
HH: Well, you just mentioned the D word, Bob Dole. And I get the sense that we’re getting fed another Bob Dole, that we’re being rushed to a John McCain candidacy that will represent exactly what Bob Dole did in 1996, which is the oldest guy in the room, has been around the longest, gets to get the Republican nomination, even though it means certain electoral doom.
MG: Right. Well, I’ve known both of them. I worked for Dole in ’96 in the doomed campaign. But I think that John McCain has stronger political skills than Bob Dole does. I think he does have the ability to reach out to independents who like…
[Note Hugh skillfully cutting off a pro McCain answer from Gerson and trying to bring Gerson back to bashing McCain on age]
HH: Is age an issue, Michael Gerson?
MG: Well, I think more energy may be the issue. I’m not sure age. In some of these debates, I believe, just personal opinion, I think that he didn’t look on top of his game, and that’s shown in a couple of settings. But you know, in those last days up in New Hampshire, by every account, and I just saw him once, I mean, he was in the zone, and very engaged, and energetic.
[Hugh wisely cuts off the debate, Gerson might say more positive things about McCain]
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transc ript.aspx?ContentGuid=46e5951c-a5f5-4dce-a1ca-eb5ee4d0cf05
|
|
. . .is magnificent, and anyone who denies it is not to be trusted as an analyst. On every level, it is a masterpiece. It will be long discussed as a masterpiece of bold type and hyperlink blue.
(chortle) |
|
|
Any more of these and McCain will be begging for mercy! Following Hugh's logic from Iowa and Huckabee, Mitt now has McCain just where he wants him - in the lead. RCP has McCain leading in Michigan by 3.4. McCain is really in trouble now. |
|
|
|
|
If McCain nominates Santorum as his running mate, what will Hugh's reaction be. lol |
|
|
|