Sunday, January 27, 2008
|
|
Bennett On McCain's Attack On Romney: "Below The Belt"
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
1:05 AM
|
Bill Bennett is a friend of John McCain's, but Bennett knows that the Arizona maverick was out-of-line to attack Romney on the war today. From NationalReview.com:
McCain Should Apologize [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
Bennett's been a McCain defender, certainly more than other conservative radio-talk-show hosts. On CNN, he just called today's Iraq hit on Romney "below the belt" and said "honor has been McCain's watchword" — he should admit that was wrong to do.
McCain going negative with such a distortion will hurt him with GOP voters who recall McCain's many attacks on other Republicans over the years. "Below the belt" doesn't win over the undecideds, and may even shake some McCain supporters who had decided to put aside their doubts. Governor Crist can say nice things about McCain, but McCain's own words are undermining that message.
|
|
|
for Richard Nixon? Mitt Romney's Dad. Given all the half-truths, Coincidence? |
|
|
would be backdrop of the general election and it would be a loosing proposition from the word go. I am not sure why people who support him overlook these facts. Billary will make his candidacy about ending american jobs and enriching big corporations, then couple that with his long list of half truths of reality...and we have a winner! Clinton, phase 2 & 3. |
|
|
election day this year then. The ticket will be Mc/Huck or Huck/Mc. The south will vote for these two (1st and 2nd) and the big states will vote McCain (Rudy is history after a 2nd or 3rd finish in FL). It's fine though if you sit it out, a Mc/Huck ticket will have social conservatives and defense/security first americans crossing over for a 48% win in November. A strong pro-life and defense ticket will give them the whitehouse no matter who the democrats nominate. |
|
|
republicans hate Mc and will not give him the time of day. Why is it that he is tied with Romney? i think your notes need to be updated to -Mitt's money not enough to buy nomination but he will keep spending it hoping for a miracle on Feb. 5th. |
|
is his signature, but Romniacs are too dense to get it so they defend him. No wonder Mitt thinks americans are stupid enough to nominate him, look who is supporting him. FYI - it's the lobbysts giving free advice without running his campaign, it's the raising fees and not taxes, it's the define amnesty, apologize for distorting Mc's record then blame staff for using the word, it's the "seeing" his parents marching with MLK (figuratively), it's the contractor made me use illegal aliens on my lawn defense (when he got caught). His double speak never ends - that is why he is a double minded man without a chance at the presidency!
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously Joe's paid to cut and paste. |
|
Why is this "Love Fest" for the maverick going on?
I can see why Slick Willy" said that his wife and John are the best of friends, just like Teddy Kennedy, Feinstein and Juan from Mexico are, as he is a democrat just like they are. If Hillary and Obama were not such a strong force running, he would have changed parties and run as a demo. He is the most arrogant, untrustworthy and deceitful candidate that has ever run on a republican ticket. If he wins the nomination, it will be the first time in 45 years of voting that I will remain at home. |
|
Mitt will win Florida and the nomination. Any Republican with half a brain, would not vote for Juan Mclame. Juan is a sad, evil, nasty lttle man.
All you McLame lovers out there know he is a RHINO...YOU KNOW HE HATES THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND WHAT IT STANDS FOR, YOU KNOW HE HATES TAX CUTS, YOU KNOW HE HATES FREE SPEECH, YOU KNOW HE LOVES ILLEGAL ALIENS......WHY DO YOU CONSTANTLY GET ON HERE AND DON'T TAKE ON THE ISSUES?
Florida is a closed primary. Finally, only sane Republicans get to vote. Mitt will win........Juan will be knocked out on Super Tuesday.....then he can just GO AWAY!!!
It will be great when Mitt is President taking on tis old fart........I would crush Mclame!! |
|
Do you really think these polls reflect what would really happen with Hillary vs. McCain? If I were a liberal I would say I favored McCain too, just so I could get him to be the nominee!!!!!!!! DUH!
He is an easy target - everyone I know who keeps informed cant stand him -
I personally had no trouble converting McCainiacs to Romney. I am a 40 something Republican mother of 4 who has never used a bumper sticker in my life.
Republican women used to be the fundraisers to help the conservatives. Our limits are extremely reduced thanks to McCain-Finance "Reform". Reform , my A...
Good luck defending him Joe.
We all know you are a Hillary Hack.
|
|
That in about 48 hours the likes of McShamnosticator Joe and the others like him will hang thier collective heads in shame for the lies and half truths they love to spew and cut and paste on this blog after their hero liar extraordinaire McFraud loses big in Fl.
If the momentum for Mitt continues to surge (and I believe it will), McNasty (and his heads in the sand, cut and paste losers from this blog and the liberal agenda pushers) will be limping into tsunami tuesday licking their wounds and begging for the money they need to put on a pretentious face of competition. Like McShameful's buddy the Huckaslicker, I suspect that McElderly will soon be quickly fading into the sunset of some future retirement villa in Az to rest easy for the rest of his natural life doing what he has done very well for many years, living easy at taxpayers expense. |
|
|
Just how low will John McCain stoop to discredit Mitt romney hours before the Florida Primary.McCain is one big thorn in the side of the republican party. to the delight of the Democrats |
|
Rich Lowry (a Mitt fan) on Mitt last year:
But [for Mitt Romney] to speak for 50 minutes or so and not to talk about the Iraq war before a conservative audience at a crucial moment in that war is bizarre and just wrong and almost offensive in my view. This doesn't seem like an oversight. He went out of his way to check off every conservative box—except the one that is politically risky at the moment.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTU0NzEyZjIzMTI5Yz ZiYjgxMjY3MTM4YTIzMjY4NTA= |
|
Peter,
You have had your chance (as in Independent or Democrat) to vote for John.
Get real.
As any military officer (or commander) will tell you, in their plan for battle, they have objectives (milestones) and an expected realization of those objectives (timetables). This is basic. I would have expected Senator McCain to have more "military expertise" than to not be able to relate the two.
Just as Huckabee "decided" to increase taxes in Arkansas to pay for government programs, having risk assigned to someone for no reason doesn't adhere to conservative policies. If you remove government regulations, people from different high risk areas can pool their resources and get insurance.
So, I, as a conservative voter that has not cast my ballot yet, can decide who I want to vote for without your BS. |
|
Willard AKA Mitt’s statement about the timetable is doublespeak. We need a timetable but keep is secret. That way he can say he supported a timetable and didn’t. Who in their right mind would think it’s possible to have that secret? Even considering a timetable (at a time when the Dems were) is a losing war strategy that will lead to surrender.
This is just another Mittism like his answer in the debate about catastrophic insurance. He said he supported a national program but not if someone in Iowa pays for a loss in FL. Is he serious? This is another one where he flips mid-sentence so he supports it and doesn’t at the same time.
Americans are tired of this dishonesty. This is not a conservative or republican value. Mitt is loose with the truth, wants to be on every side of every issue, and says whatever he needs to get elected. This is his track record all the way back to 1994. If he is the nominee he will be torn to shreds with his own words and record.
Oh, and for those swayed by fake testimonials… I used to support Mitt, I really like his hair, he looks so Presidential, and he says things that make me feel good, maybe he will tell us all how to make money like he did. But this last reminder (Timetable) that he wants to surrender really has me switching to McCain. He is the only one who can lead us from day one as Commander is Chief.
Go Johnny Go…
|
|
|
Unless there is something politically to gain by admitting he was wrong, don't expect that much out of McCain. Romney is right, McCain is desparate! |
|
Bendict Arnold
Battle of Saratoga
MacCain
POW
Benedict Arnold
West Point
MacCain
Gang of 14
Anti judges
Pro tax increase
Anti free speech
Crooked talk |
|
Byron York on Romney and Iraq: I have to say that, looking at what Romney said last April, I think McCain has a point. Here is the exchange in question, from ABC's "Good Morning America" on April 3, 2007:
...I think it's fair to conclude that Romney was saying he was in favor of Bush and Maliki setting a secret timetable for a U.S. troop withdrawal. (By the way, I didn't think that was a bad idea, on the grounds that the Iraqis needed to be pushed hard before they would get anything done.) Certainly people who were listening took it that way; at the time of Romney's statement, there was a fair amount of reaction, much of it from the left, to the effect that Romney was coming around to the idea of a timetable. His pledge to veto a congressionally-imposed timetable seemed based on the idea that such a timetable would necessarily involve a publicly-known deadline, although there are clearly separation-of-powers objections one could make, too.
In addition, I think it's indisputable that, at the time, McCain's Republican rivals supported the surge but were also happy that it was McCain who was all the way out on the limb. Last February, someone in the Romney camp told me that yes, Romney supported the surge, but that "McCain owns the surge." The implication was that if things didn't go well, McCain would be the one to suffer; the other guys would be OK precisely because they didn't put it all on the line for the surge. So when I look at Romney's comments on "Good Morning America," I see a lot of caution and a bit of behind-covering, as well.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTQyZTVjMzM3MjNlNj M4YzQ5YjdmOGU0NDVkZWJhYjc |
|
Senator McCain's comments distorting Romney's statements about timetables and benchmarks is one thing.
But what bothers me the most about the exchange is Senator McCain's comments about Governor Romney's need to apologize to the soldiers. Indicating that Romney doesn't value their sacrifice. That is the most blatant example of pandering by any candidate in the campaign so far. |
|
First, I'm not a Romney fan. I like Romney, but I have my reservations.
Secondly, military folk support McCain for the same reason many evangelicals support Huckabee. He is strong in their main area of concern.
That speaks well of McCain in one particular area. But I look at the fuller picture. He passed legislation that runs roughshod over free political speech. I can't trust him to appoint conservative judges. He backed a deeply flawed immigration bill. He has a bad temperment and takes things personally.
On a practical side, he's not well financed. He has a fractured base. His base of support, the media, will eventually turn on him.
And on an ironic side, if we didn't have unconstitutional campaign finance reform non-millionaires would have a better chance of running, winning, and not spending all their time trying to fund raise. |
|
Wait until we have waves of refugees from Iraq emigrating to the U.S. after we "redeploy" out of there. We don't even have the spine to enforce our own laws or secure our borders so it's open season. The last amnesty in 1986 made citizens of some of the people who blew up the WTC in 1993. There is no homeland security without border security. McCain and the Democrats would like to do the opposite of what we should do: secure the border, restore respect for the law with actual enforcement. Instead we will get an amnesty only the illegal aliens and the corrupt corporations who hire them want. The borders will remain wide open so more workers can be imported for the jobs that can't be exported. Cheap labor (GOP) and cheap votes (Dems) take precedence over security. We are playing into the hands of the jihadis. We may just be the paper tiger Osama thinks we are.
|
|
Questions for illegal apologists like John McCain:
Why does The National Council of the Race (la raza in spanish) and the Chamber of Commerce get to negotiate a "Comprehensive Shafting of The American Citizens" behind closed doors? Since when does an organization representing foreign nationals breaking our laws get to rewrite our immigration laws to suit the lawbreakers? Isn't this akin to allowing NAMBLA to rewrite our laws regarding child predators? Or allowing organized crime syndicates to rewrite racketeering, gambling, prostitution, and extortion laws?
We The People are being told by our representatives that we should sit down and shut up while they invite in the entire world. We The People should get some say in this matter. Another amnesty will set off a stampede like we have never seen before. There is not much time to save our country. All the money and power are on the side of shoving this amnesty down our throats. The RNC wants an amnesty candidate, don't vote for one. |
|
The Stupid Party
The RNC wants an amnesty candidate.
Another amnesty will result in Democrat majorities for decades, or until they are supplanted by the La Raza Party, why doesn't the RNC know that? How stupid do you have to be to import voters for the opposition at the same time you alienate your own voters? Nominating any of the amnesty trio (McCain, Huckabee, Rudy) is a losing proposition, we will not support them. If the GOP intends to surrender our sovereignty and abandon the rule of law, they will find in November 2008, that they still have their big money/cheap labor donors, but they do not have voters. GOP-RIP |
|
DNC Joe has been here and dropped his usual excrement.
Thanks DNC Joe for stopping by. |
|
|
|
McCain is not confident he will be the WINNER of the nomination or he would resign his Senate seat.
So much for being a winner! LOL!!!! |
|
Hugh Hewitt opines that:
McCain must win Florida, or his campaign will be revealed for the anti-GOP base coaltion I suspect it really is.
The implication is that Hugh’s man Romney is the real Republican in the race. I don;t buy that, given Romney’s history of flip flops, and it seems neither did a lot of New Hampshire voters.
Jim Geraghty reports on numbers from CNN:
Romney and McCain were almost even among those who identified themselves as Republicans, with 33 and 34 percent, respectively.
That’s more along the lines of what I expected.
And Hugh’s own fellow Townhall blogger Patrick Ruffini writes that:
I don’t think we’ve assimilated the fact that Mitt Romney was never going to resurrect the Bush coalition.
http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/punditry/comments/whos_the _real_republican_mccain_or_romney/ |
|
Florida Gov. Charlie Crist will spend time stumping with John McCain in the final two days before the critical primary here.
Briefly addressing reporters in the back of the St. Pete hotel ballroom where he threw his support to McCain at a Republican dinner, Crist said he made his up mind who to vote for earlier in the week but only decided to go public earlier today.
"You know, it’s a gut thing," Crist said, standing next to McCain. "And I just feel in my heart he’s the right man for the job at the right time. He’s a great leader. He’s a true American hero, and I’m honored to stand with him today."
Crist said he would "absolutely" hit the campaign trail for the Arizonan tomorrow and Monday.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0108/Crist_to_ stump_with_McCain_no_deal_on_cat_fund.html
|
|
Bill Owens says:
"Americans love a winner, said General Patton. And Mittens is not a winner."
Let's see, who ran against Bush for the presidency and lost?
Who pushed the biggest amnesty bill in American history and lost?
Who is losing the delegate count for the nomination?
Yeah right Bill, your guy is a real winner ;-)
Thompson/Watts for POTUS at the brokered convention. |
|
Bill Owens,
Now that you mention it, McCain has NEVER, EVER pandered to the Illegal Aliens (hispanic voting block).
He's NEVER, EVER pandered to the so-called "moderates" (with Campaign Finance Reform) - after all, what could be more fair than to prevent political speech (especially before an election)? It is, of course, the MONEY in politics which corrupts politicians! It couldn't possibly be that they are - all by themselves - corrupt. But rather than prosecuting them for their corrupt behavior, let's just outlaw political speech before an election - to keep the corrupt politician in office.
He's NEVER, EVER pandered to Democrats (maybe, someday, he and Teddy Kennedy will co-author some piece of Socialist Legislation) - oh wait, they already have... My bad.
But, hey, you go right ahead an support Juan McCain - Leader of the Gang of 14. |
|
|
The Clintons understand that the big wild card is Hispanics and they will reflexively vote against Obama. With the SC results where 90% of the overwhelming and historic Black turnout went for Obama, he has unofficially become "the great Black hope". And many Hispanic and white Democrats will react to that coronation by flocking to Clinton. Whether that is fortunate or unfortunate, I don't know. It just is. |
|
What are you smoking? Which Democrats "want" to run against Romney? The Libs in the MSM are doing everything short of giving McCain a Lewinski to prop up his campaign, and are, basically, "Borking" Romney (as you, too, seem to be doing here). THEY (the Libs/Dems) want to run against McCain because they know they can beat HIM.
|
|
http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/01/26/3894/
"I believe that similarly, right or wrong, McCain’s maverick positioning, often going against the conservative grain, and rubbing us all the wrong way on a number of levels, should be understood, with respectful disagreement on substance; not just knee-jerk soapboxing demagoguery, twisting his actual position, to make it all seem worse so as to be more palatable to lay into him." And
"But, angry conservatives have also muddied the issues, by over-exaggerating some of the indignation and outrage, misrepresenting the other side of the facts. These issues are not always so black-and-white as the demonizers want to make them out to be. I suppose it’s easier to be angry at someone if you can demonize him, further than the actual facts will allow."
|
|
Self-described "independents & moderates" are mostly liberal leaning people that do not like to be labeled. The idea that these people would break for McCain in a general election is laughable - especially if Obama gets the democrat nomination. Obama is clearly the choice for the indies and mods. His message is taylor-made for these folks. Anyone who thinks McCain would beat Obama in a general election is simply dreaming.
If its between McCain & Hillary, then once again the indies & mods will go for Hillary. Why? Because these people are against the war on terror. That is really the only difference in stance on the positions between Hillary and McCain.
Face it - McCain is a loser in the general election because the base WILL NOT support him. |
|
|
Because he is the establishment candidate, and they are in fear that the old guard won't get the nomination. The maverick conservatives are trying to take over the party again, and they have to be fought back. |
|
http://race42008.com/2007/12/15/mccains-military-support/
McCain’s Military Support
Quite impressive:
ARLINGTON, VA — Today over 100 retired admirals and generals endorsed John McCain for President of the United States at a press conference in Columbia, South Carolina. These distinguished leaders supporting John McCain come from all branches of the armed services and include former POWs, Medal of Honor recipients and former members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
John McCain was joined today in Columbia by five distinguished military veterans: Admiral Leighton “Snuffy” Smith, USN (Ret.); Vice Admiral Mike Bowman, USN (Ret.); Rear Admiral Tom Lynch, USN (Ret.); Rear Admiral Bob Shumaker, USN (Ret.); and Major General Stan Spears, USA, Adjutant General of South Carolina.
“This nation is at war and we’d better damn well understand that fact,” said Admiral Leighton “Snuffy” Smith, USN (Ret.). “John McCain understands it, and he is the only candidate that has not wavered one bit in his position regarding the importance of victory in the war against Islamic extremism or in his commitment to the troops who are doing the fighting. He has consistently demonstrated the kind and style of leadership that we believe is essential in our next Commander in Chief. Our nation faces a growing array of serious foreign policy challenges. John McCain is the ONE candidate who, in our view, truly understands the strategic landscape and is fully prepared to deal decisively and effectively with those who wish to be our friends and, importantly, those who wish us harm.”
|
|
geoffrobinson writes: "To McCain Fans
You may win the primary, but you will lose and lose badly in the general."
If McCain should lose it would be in the primary. If he is this Diablo-like moderate/leftist as he is pilloried here, undoubtedly, he would not win in the primary. And conversely, if he the moderate/leftist Diablo he should garner more votes in the general election from like-minded Independents, who are the deciding factor in our general elections.
Or we could stick with Mittens and lose 35 states. (of course we would hold in Utah)
|
|
Perhaps it is because Romney has been exposed as "
Mittens the Pander Bear". Perhaps it is because McCain is much more electable. Americans love a winner, said General Patton. And Mittens is not a winner. |
|
Hugh is branching out for Mittens. Hugh's Article VI movie is a cinematic love letter to his beloved.
http://www.article6themovie.com/index.php |
|
Real conservatives shouldn't trash the Constitution like McCain did with McCain-Feingold. You may win the primary, but you will lose and lose badly in the general.
Conservative disgust with McCain is real and deep and deserved. He has earned his problems. Once his base, the media, turns on him, he's toast. It seems McCain is the establishment candidate. Maybe it is because he has made so many friends over the years in the Senate. But so did Bob Dole.
McCain is on balance a conservative. But his flaws (temper, making things personal) and poor judgment (Gang of 14) don't make up for being right on Iraq. He wasn't the only one right about Iraq. He isn't Petraeus. He gets credit, but only so much.
Now, we can add to that McCain has given up the Straight Talk. When liberal media organs don't back McCain on this point, you know McCain lied. |
|
AND rebukes Hugh, Mark Levin and Rush to boot!
From Dean's Weekly Standard column: "The conclusion that McCain's perceived electability along with his steadfastness on the war makes him the best Republican candidate is not manifestly unreasonable. And some talk radio listeners will reach that conclusion, regardless of what talk radio hosts say." |
|
on H&C last night? Sean read Mitt's quote verbatim from Mitts GMC interview regarding the troop withdrawl and it was clear that Mitt was NOT for a timetable. He said the President was right to veto any bill that would require a timetable and he would do the same thing. Gramnesty basically had no response and you could tell by the shade of red that his face turned that he and McAmnesty were caught in a bold face lie!
McCain is showing more and more that he's a desperate lier!! He's lying about his position to secure the border, he's lying about his position on the Bush tax cuts, and he's lying about Mitt!
Say no to Amnesty! Say no to the idea of man made global warming! Say no to higher taxesSay no Canadian style price controls on prescription drugs! Say no to the Keating 5! Say no to the gang of 14!
Say yes to Conservatism! Say yes to Romney!!! |
|
1) John McCain's Hypocrisy Disgraces American Troops
http://www.mymanmitt.com/mitt-romney/2008/01/john-mccains-h ypocrisy-disgraces.asp
2) McCain: Romney Favored Iraq Withdrawal
Key quotes:
However, quotes circulated by McCain's campaign didn't show Romney making that comment.
By raising Iraq, McCain sought to shift the campaign in Florida back to his strength, national security, and away from Romney's, the economy.
Nice try, John. But LYING doesn't help.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5if5DTLHOkjV981GiHLtXNtHO aTDgD8UDQP581
3) McCain considers setting benchmarks for Iraqis
Key quotes:
McCain said Thursday that he hadn't yet decided on precise benchmarks. "They'd have to be specific, and they (Iraqi government officials) would have to meet them," he said.
Asked what penalty would be imposed if Iraq failed to meet his benchmarks, he said: "I think everybody knows the consequences. Haven't met the benchmarks? Obviously, then, we're not able to complete the mission. Then you have to examine your options."
It appears hypocritical McCain follows benchmarks, too. Unbelievable. McCain overreached this time.
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/byauthor/166271 |
|
As the wife of a retired career military officer, I am appalled at this dishonorable behavior by McCain.
I'm not familiar with the Naval Academy code, but at West Point every cadet pledges:
"A cadet will not LIE, cheat or steal,
or tolerate those who do."
For over 170 years anyone found after investigation by the cadet honor board to have violated that code was totally shunned by the rest of the corps. No one would talk to him, pass food at the dinner table, aid with homework or otherwise associate with him. Few lasted more than a week before resigning.
That policy has shifted a bit, but the principle is clear: a man who is running as a military hero has acted dishonorably and has thereby forfeited in my mind any respect whatsoever. |
|
Mutt is a dog. As governor of Massachusetts, he set an example for public employees by being out of state for 240 days in his last year as governor alone. While he was away, part of the Big Dig fell on a woman and crushed her. That cost the state several million dollars. Mutt returned to the state and made a big show of himself as executive and declared after a time that the tunnels were safe.
At last report, the tunnels which run underwater had 245 leaks.
He adhered to his NO NEW TAXES pledge only by shifting the burden from the state to local governments and raising fees for things like drivers' licenses, car registration and so on. The cost of doing business and living in Massachusetts went up, up, up during Romney's Administration.
He touts his experience in stimulating business, yet Massachusetts was 46th in the nation in attracting new businesses.
He was not a "can do" governor. He was a "didn't do" governor and left a huge bill for rehabilitating Massachusetts' crumbling infrastructure.
He promised to rebuild the Republican Party's representation in the state legislatures. It shrank during his governorship.
When he was running even with Teddy Kennedy in a senatorial election, the dark side of Romney's executive experience sank him. Some of Romney's employees, from a formerly profitable company which Romney's corporation had taken over, came to Massachusetts and showed how Romney had enriched himself, his associates and his investors by firing all the workers and then rehiring them at lower wages and benefits.
Romney's surge against Kennedy withered and died, and he lost every city and town in Massachusetts, including his own.
As a Republican nominee, he could do one things that Al Bore famously did: he could lose his own state.
And like Al Bore, he would always find someone else to blame for everything. With Romney, the buck stops elsewhere. Always. |
|
|
McCain probably just had a "senior moment" during one of his lucid periods between flashbacks. That's all. He thought it was the general election, and Romney was Obama. Get used to it if he wins. |
|
I was listening to FoxNews yesterday and they were talking about how:
"MITT ROMNEY HAS FLIP-FLOPPED ON EVERY SINGLE POSITION HE HAS EVER HELD" (total lie), and how...
"PEOPLE LIKE MCCAIN BECAUSE THEY KNOW HE SPEAKS THE TRUTH AND STICKS TO IT".
Um, for one thing, this "Mitt flip-flops on everything" is just FoxNews spewing McCain Camp propaganda. Mitt changed his position on abortion. Good. Any other changes are pretty much subtle policy adjustments and not wholesale differences of philosophy. Mitt has ALWAYS been against Gay Marriage and still is.
Meanwhile, McCain actually AUTHORED the Amnesty Bill now he talks about how WE MUST BUILD THE FENCE! He voted against the Bush Tax Cuts twice now WE MUST MAKE THE TAX CUTS PERMANENT!.
And THESE are NOT pandering? These are NOT fli-flops? Huh?
Governor Crist actually said that he endorsed McCain because "MCCAIN IS A TAX-CUTTER". Huh? On what planet? |
|
Just wondering, why didn't "super" reporter Glenn Johnson challenge McCain on his fallacious accusations? I guess the AP isn't concerned about reporting real news, only promoting their own agenda.
McCain fans take heed. I promise you all that this bum has lost my vote forever. I will not support a party, which idly stands by and let's this miscreant promote half truths.
Trust me, on Election Day, if he's the nominee, I will make posts every fifteen minutes on multiple blogs just to protest him and demonstrate my unwillingness to go to the polls on that day.
It sickens me that Republicans support this bum. He's no Washington, US Grant, or Eisenhower. He grandstands before a populace, which has limited knowledge of current or historical events, without fair challenge.
Therefore, McCain supporters, rest assured you will be alienating countless Republicans whose support you will not be able to garner this fall no matter who is the Democratic nominee.
|
|
|
|
Just a word of warning here folks.
When more than 18 newspapers in New Hampshire came out (all on the same day) and publically endorsed McCain it was a planned conspiracy against Mitt Romney. How could Mitt win with the papers printing daily endorsements of McCain and negative editorials and articles of Mitt. Some even had 'full page' endorsements and photos for John McCain on the day of the election.
These papers really don't want capable, moral, conservative Romney to be president. Most of them also don't want McCain, but as the months wear on, they know that Mitt would be much harder to beat on the issues, vs Billary and Obama.
Then it was on the news last week, that most of those 18 papers that backed McCain in NH, also backed John KERRY vs Bush in 2004! What crock!
So don't be surprised if more liberal papers come out for McCain in the next day or two. I think it's a very dishonest way to win a campaign. There's a new conspiracy afloat guys, to bring Mitt down any way possible, even to the extent of lying and twisting the facts. We need a good honest man a president, and that person is Mitt Romney.
Don't listen to Real Clear Politics. It's much too early for the national polls to mean anything.
McCain keeps mentioning the Congressmen who are endorsing him, yet Romney never mention his, and yet Mitt has the most Congressmen backing of any candidate. Check it out. |
|
I love how McCain decided to do this over the weekend - when most of talk radio (which would have eaten him ALIVE from the second he started, and probably still will on Monday) is off the air and enjoying time off. He has 2 whole days to spread the lie and do the damage before it comes back to bite him in the butt - I can just envision Limbaugh, Hewitt, and Hannity simultaneously chomping down on his leg right now.
The problem is, it will have passed through the news cycle by then and it will have become "truth"... Why John, WHY!?! |
|
will turn on him when it is time to elect a president. McCain will not know what to do when his " buddies " in the MSM destroy him come the fall and it is time to get their Democrat elected.
So screw the lib media. They need to be ignored as we pick our candidate. Oh...at this point it should be obvious that you don't pick the person the MSM wants you to pick. ( McCain ) |
|
|
The MSM and the "establishment" are working overtime to force feed us McCain. They (MSM and establishment) don't want any "outsiders". Whether you like Romney or not, the reality of how difficult it is to run against "the machine" should frighten everyone. McCain will not win, and even if he does, he's a Hillary clone. |
|
In an interview with ABC News in 2007, Romney said: "There's no question that the president and (Iraqi) Prime Minister al-Maliki have to have a series of timetables and milestones that they speak about. But those shouldn't be for public pronouncement. You don't want the enemy to understand how long they have to wait in the weeds until you're going to be gone."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080126/ap_on_el_pr/republicans _florida
McCain charging Romney with favoring "private" timetables: Fair. McCain attempting, as he has, to paint Romney as favoring the position of Obama and Hillary on withdrawal: Unfair. Score one for Hugh.
|
|
How is McCain better than Rudy or Romney on the economy, the war on terror, conservative values?
Can't you people who support McCain see what is happening here? If you get your way and McCain can fool enough people to vote for him, the GOP will fracture and it is over. McCain is so disgusting to conservatives that they will NEVER vote for him. I am talking millions of people who feel like this. When the enemy ( the liberals at the NY Times ) support you, then a few red flags and strobe lights should be going off.
Romney or Rudy do not have this problem..especially Romney. People will not stay home if Romney is our guy. Rudy can actually win some blue states like NJ. So why not Rudy? He hasn't pissed off the base to the point where they sit the election out.
Hillary is a nightmare... yet, McCain has somehow won a few primaries and is now WORSE than Hillary to many in the GOP. It is actually pretty amazing. |
|
|
McCain's a senator, one of a hundred. They know eachother well, they have to work with eachother to get things done. When McCain loses the nomination he'll continue on in the senate. Santorum, I'm sure backed Specter for this very reason. Btw, wasn't 1960 the last time a sitting U.S. Senator was elected Potus? Regardless of whether Hillary or Obama get the nomination, the republican nominee will be up against a senator. |
|
"Awwww... Does uh widdle baby-waby wanna shnookums?"
Shnookums!?! My favorite! :P
LOL you're adding a whole lot to the conversation. |
|
Those comparative Polls mean absolutely nothing at this point and you know it.... You sound like one of those Democratic Strategists on FOX..... The polls are the first thing that they quote when they are talking up their favorite Republican Candidate McCain....
They say how they hope that they can face Romney in the fall instead of McCain and the go on and on about how bad Romney is and how good McCain is...
After the debate on MSN Thursday night.... Mathews and a reporter from the Washington Post said that the truth is that the Demo's are afraid of Romney because of his strength in Business and his command of the Economy plus the fact that he is truly an outsider...
As Rush has told us time and again, one sure way to learn who we ought to be getting behind is to listen to who the MSM and the Demo strategists trash the most..... because that uncovers their fears....
Hell, the MSM and the Demos love McCain.... and why? cuz they know that they can kill him in a General Election... He's old, He can be easily targeted by the anti-war group and he represents "OLd Republicans" to the voters... and, they know they can out "liberal" him. |
|
|
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/byauthor/166271 |
|
|
|
|
Kudos to you. I laughed at that one. Very good. |
|
"The Dems really want to face Mitt because they know they can take him down."
Which is why the Dems keep saying publicly that McCain is the one they fear, McCain is the strongest candidate, McCain is the one they hope doesn't get the nomination - because they're being honest and candid. Uh huh.
So gullible, Joe. Hey, I have the email address of a down-on-his-luck Nigerian prince who will reward you handsomely if you will just wire him some cash.
Wait, don't tell me, it's just reverse-reverse psychology by the DNC, right Joe? |
|
You left out the endorsements of the last two Republican whips in the Senate: Jon Kyl (Hugh's favorite senator) and Trent Lott.
You also left out Senator Tom Coburn who's ACU ratings are off the chart. |
|
Let us now look at some of his endorsements:
-New York Times
-Geraldo Rivera
-Joe Lieberman
-Bill and Hillary Clinton
-nearly every member of the liberal media (most Newspapers have endorsed him for this very reason, phrasing his strength as an ability to “attract the support of liberals”)
If you are a Republican, do not let the most liberal elements of the media tell you who to vote for and who is “electable”. Electability polls fluctuate wildly every week (+16 this very week in favor of Romney). A recent example: Bob Dole was considered far and away the “most electable” Republican because he was respected by Democrats and because of his military service.
Voters in Florida and around the country, if you are a conservative, consider whether McCain’s career record of liberal positions and ineptitude is actually the best you can hope for. Consider if he is the most electable candidate even if many prominent conservatives have vowed to “sit out” this election if he’s the nominee.
|
|
If McCain is a RINO then the Senate won't have a single Republican war hero when Hagel leaves (unless you want to call him a RINO too)
The Democrats have a couple war heroes. That's pretty hard to spin. |
|
|
John McCain is a stronger candidate than Mitt Romney in the general. Wake up. The Dems really want to face Mitt because they know they can take him down. |
|
From the Arizona Daily Star (1.26.07)
Still, several Senate Democrats who oppose the troop buildup and also may seek the presidency said they were struck by McCain's comments.
"We Catholics call that an epiphany," said Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joseph Biden, D-Del., who is sponsoring the main Democratic resolution opposing the troop buildup.
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said: "I called for that . . . several weeks ago. I'm glad that John McCain agrees with me.
"He's somebody who has enormous influence with the White House. He's been one of the key champions of this escalation of troops."
Read the whole thing:
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/byauthor/166271 |
|
sampo said, "Mittbots are trying to have it both ways. 1. McCain supported it too (which so happens to be false)"
I provided a link to a news article and quotes directly from McCain's mouth that the USA would "not be able to complete the mission" in Iraq if his benchmarks are not met. Where is your evidence to the contrary? You have none.
There is nothing wrong with this position by McCain. But pointing fingers at Romney for taking the same position a year ago is hypocritical. |
|
Like moths to a flame. Hugh puts up a romney story and the mccain guys show up. I saw the obama speech tonite. you mccain guys better pay attention. It will be hillary /obama . The party hacks want mccain / goober. Can't wait to see gramps and he haw on the campaign trail. If those to guys were dems the pubbies would view it as a gift from God. Dole redux.
. |
|
Because their only defense is anger when the truth is just not there.
McCain is a liberal, A genuine RINO
Real Clear Politics is playing with the polls, by using out of sequence polling data. I think someone might be betting on the polls, so they change the number of samples and skip polls data to favor one candidate more than another. I suspect that RCP has been compromised. I took their data and made a graph using the six last data samples from start to finish and the graph makes sense and Mitt Romney is rising more than McCain. McCain is being favored by RCP. And Hillary is being favored over Obama. That seems to make sense, they are both liberals, and friends.
But then, could it be that their are so many hypocrites that an honest man has them all in a panic. Will Americans destroy their heritage and the future of their children voting for people like McCain? He waited to the last because he did not want to be exposed so soon, but Mitt has lasted better than them all.
"It certainly is amazing how much panic an honest man will cause a multitude of hypocrites.”
SEE:
http://e-spirituality.townhall.com/
and
http://www.judicialwatch.org
READ THE NEWS LINKS ON THE LEFT |
|
Let's be realistic and honest. We cannot stay in Iraq forever if progress is not being made. Both Romney and McCain have said this. Fortunately progress is being made so we don't have to explore this possibility right now.
But McCain is the hypocrite on this for pointing fingers at Romney when he is on record for saying the same thing. I guess this is what he means by "straight talk."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XazpaYwFKd8 |
|
|
Ever hear of Scooter Libby? |
|
"...minus Larry Craig."
:-)
+ + + |
|
|
I'm not an idiot Sampo. Read DeerJerkyDave's comment for my answer. If you've been following Romney like I have you would obviously know that McCain is lying through his teeth. Well, lying wouldn't be the word, more like misinforming the general electorate, hmm I guess that would be a lie wouldn't it. |
|
Mittbots are trying to have it both ways.
1. McCain supported it too (which so happens to be false)
2. Romney never supported timetables.
Even if you can't stand Mitt, you've gotta admire the smokescreen he and his supporters send up. |
|
The Powerline guys are right, and, in the super-heated context during which the squishy-sounding Romney comments were uttered, they WERE the equivalent of distancing on the surge. I remember very clearly discussing them on this site, and criticizing both Hugh and then-contributor Dean for refusing even to acknowledge the controversy about them. They were part an parcel of a clear Romney tactic to occupy the area just to the cautious left of McCain and others on the war (up to and including the arguably more resopnsibly but still waffly "surge apparently working" debate tiff).
You could see the wheels turning when Mitt talked about the "secret" discussions. If things had gone badly and opinion had further soured within the party, what do you think the chances would be of Mitt claiming that such comments DIDN'T distance him from the McCain-Bush-Petraeus line? |
|
"Ever heard of Richard Nixon?" LOL
I guess I should qualify my statement as "Modern day, well known conservative Republican whom I respect"
...minus Larry Craig. |
|
Romney supported a "secret" date for surrender. (good luck with a secret in a pre-surge Iraq)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVkftphrdsw |
|
McCain is a big hypocrite on this. It turns out that just a few weeks ago he was saying the exact same things Romney said a year ago. That there needs to be specific benchmarks in Iraq. Even worse McCain implies that there would need to be a public timetable for withdrawal. Here is a snippet and link from the news article:
"McCain said Thursday that he hadn’t yet decided on precise benchmarks. 'They’d have to be specific, and they (Iraqi government officials) would have to meet them,' he said.
"Asked what penalty would be imposed if Iraq failed to meet his benchmarks, he said: 'I think everybody knows the consequences. Haven’t met the benchmarks? Obviously, then, we’re not able to complete the mission. Then you have to examine your options.”
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/byauthor/166271
In other words, McCain is saying here that if the benchmarks aren't met by a specific time then we have to abort the mission. Class act McCain. You get a big thumbs down from me. |
|
13 comments so far. 7 are from Joe. Color me surprised. It's all Joe, all the time.
Regarding this statement by Hugh:
"McCain going negative with such a distortion will hurt him with GOP voters who recall McCain's many attacks on other Republicans over the years."
Huckabee's covert negative attacks on Romney worked just fine in Iowa. Who's to say McCain's won't work in Florida? |
|
Other conservative politicians--or former politicians--have taken their anti-McCain arguments to absurd lengths. Take Tom DeLay, for instance, whose K Street pandering led to numerous indictments and contributed greatly to the Republican losses in 2006. The former House majority leader said, without a trace of irony in his voice, that John McCain "has done more to hurt the Republican party than any elected official I know of."
Mark Levin, a longtime confidant of both Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity who now hosts his own increasingly popular talk show, took the anti-McCain argument a step further on his show last Wednesday. "At this point, anybody who supports John McCain and claims to be a conservative, let me be blunt: You're not a conservative."
Which came as a surprise to Jack Kemp, the ardent supply-sider who was the conservative alternative to George H.W. Bush in 1988. "That's just so preposterous," said Kemp. "I don't agree with McCain on several things. He's gotten right on the economy. He's right on foreign policy. And he's right on the war on terror."
And no doubt a surprise also to Phil Gramm (lifetime ACU rating of 95), whose presidential campaign was endorsed by
National Review in 1996. And to Sam Brownback, a stalwart conservative and one of the most outspoken pro-life politicians in America today. And to Tom Coburn from Oklahoma, arguably the most conservative member of the Senate.
"John McCain and I have stood side by side on many issues," Coburn said in endorsing McCain last week. The most important, he added, are "fiscal responsibility" and the "sanctity of human life."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/0 00/014/651mibdg.asp?pg=2
Hugh worked for Nixon and defended DeLay, even those those two have did more damage to the GOP than any persons, living or dead. |
|
Here's commentary from the Weekly Standard:
Like so many McCain critics, Limbaugh turned to former Senator Rick Santorum--"whose conservative credentials are beyond question"--as an expert witness. "I don't hardly agree with him on hardly any issues," Santorum said.
Really? Santorum's lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union is 88. John McCain's is 82.3. One would suppose there might be some overlap. The difference between a real conservative and a phony one apparently lies in those six points.
Although many others have been as critical of McCain, perhaps no one has been as hypocritical. In 2006, when Santorum was running for reelection, he asked McCain to come to Pennsylvania to campaign on his behalf. When McCain obliged, Santorum put the video on his campaign website, listing it first among "key events" of the year. That's gratitude, Santorum-style.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/0 00/014/651mibdg.asp?pg=1 |
|
"I've never seen such a blatant lie from a Republican. I hope he'll have to pay for it later."
Ever heard of Richard Nixon?
+ + + |
|
I've never been a McCain fan but I always took him to be a stand up guy. Today he fell down, and he fell down hard. Most of the statements he's made against Romney have been defensible. Not this one - this one just sends McCain over the deep end and leaves him there. I've never seen such a blatant lie from a Republican. I hope he'll have to pay for it later.
At what point in time has Romney EVER been for timetables or withdrawal? McCain should apologize for using a Democrat tactic against his own - pulling a quote completely out of context and then using it as a selling point for his candidacy. Absolutely ridiculous, and a bit desperate if you ask me. If you haven't seen the quote, go over to Hot Air and you'll see how stupid McCain is for pulling a stunt like this.
I hope the new media and talk radio rail him for this on Monday. If he gets the nomination, I'm staying home, specifically because of this stunt. I would have voted for him before today, but now I'm just disgusted.
Also: Huckabee's in on it too, I've just read. Let the love fest begin! |
|
One wonders why Santorum was a huge fan of Arlen Specter and his lifetime rating of 44.7 and his 2006 rating of 43.
WHY RICK!? WHY? |
|
|
|
Crist endorses Rudy, I mean McCain [Mark R. Levin]
That Crist is some guy. It seems until recently, he'd told Rudy he would endorse him. Now that Rudy is down, and McCain is up, he endorses McCain. Crist appears to be a man of negotiable loyalty. I'll see if he'll come on my show on Monday so we can discuss his principled reasons (uh-huh) for endorsing Rudy, er, McCain. I don't think he'll come on, however.
01/26 10:55 PM
Wow, it is like Levin is channeling Hugh Hewitt.
Where Is Jeb? [Mark R. Levin]
I keep hearing that Jeb Bush quietly supports Romney. Now that Crist has made his last-minute endorsement of McCain, I wonder if Jeb will have the will to endorse Romney. Or maybe Jeb is worried that in a match-up with Crist, he might lose the endorsement game. I would hope he has more confidence than that.
01/26 10:03 PM
If Obama-McCain [Mark R. Levin]
As I watched Obama's speech, I tried to imagine an Obama-McCain match-up. And I think McCain would get his clock cleaned, despite early polls and predictions to the contrary. McCain cannot unite conservatives (due largely to years of hostility toward them, regardless of endorsements) and he will not win over enough Democrats and Independents from Obama to make win.
01/26 09:31 PM
In McCain's Corner [Mark R. Levin]
Since I left for dinner, Crist and Howard Baker have endorsed McCain tonight. As for Crist being hugely important, if McCain wins he will take credit and be given some credit; if McCain loses he will look foolish and Romney will have been strengthened by it. As for Baker, he is irrelevant.
01/26 09:25 PM
Gov. Charlie Crist... [David Freddoso]
...is going to endorse McCain. This is a huge surprise, and very good news for McCain. Crist is extremely popular.
01/26 07:36 PM
|
|
In launching the ad the McCain campaign also released a statement from U.S. Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger and former CIA Director R. James Woolsey:
"We couldn't disagree more with Governor Romney's recent suggestion that foreign policy experience really doesn't matter when it comes to evaluating who should be our next president and commander in chief. America is at war. Our military forces are engaged in Iraq, in Afghanistan and elsewhere against a determined, vicious enemy. We are facing serious challenges, in a nuclear-armed Pakistan, in Latin America with the rise of Hugo Chavez, and in other corners of the globe. In such dangerous times, John McCain has the necessary experience and judgment to strengthen our national security and lead our nation and allies. He has had extensive contact with foreign leaders and military officials. John McCain has been on the ground in many of the world's hot spots, including several trips to Iraq and Afghanistan, and also the tribal areas of Waziristan. As an ex-Navy pilot and POW, he understands first-hand how political decisions in Washington impact those serving in our Armed Forces. On Iraq, John McCain's experience and judgment served him well. For years, despite public opinion, he called for a surge of forces and a new strategy in Iraq to prevail against our enemies -- a strategy that is now succeeding. In contrast, Governor Romney, with no national security experience, was a follower on Iraq, while John McCain showed strong leadership and vision."
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/01/mccains_ex perience.html
|
|
Whipsawed by the continuing bad news from the endorsement front, then bolstered every so slightly by some transparently cherry-picked Hugh Hewitt lipstick-on-a-pig, then crushed again by another endorsement for the hated McCain, runner over of Rombot puppies.
+ + + |
|
"The next President of the United States must be a leader of courage, not a weather vane who shifts in the wind. John McCain will not waver in the face of the enemy. He's been tested under fire in war and did not wilt on Iraq when the polls went south and the drumbeat for withdrawal grew louder. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for Governor Romney. When it came to unequivocally advocating and supporting the successful surge in Iraq, John McCain was rock solid while Governor Romney sought political cover by indicating his support for secret' withdrawal timetables. At a critical moment, John McCain proved that he was ready to be Commander in Chief. Unfortunately, Governor Romney didn't. Governor Romney failed the test of leadership on the most crucial national security issue facing the United States with American combat forces in the field; he wilted. John McCain stood tall."
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/01/mccain_rom ney_go_backandforth.html |
|
"Bennett's been a McCain defender, certainly more than other conservative radio-talk-show hosts."
CERTAINLY MORE THAN OTHER CONSERVATIVE RADIO TALK SHOW HOSTS?
let me break it down for Hugh and the NRO: taking out a couple minutes out of the day to NOT bash McCain does not make you a "McCain defender".
Next to Republican Pharisees Hugh and Limbaugh, EVERYONE is a McCain defender. |
|
|
"On the other hand, there’s little doubt that Romney was less resolute on Iraq than McCain." |
|
|
infighter going. My mistake. |
|
|
and if he isn't what's a conservative like Bill doing befriending McCain? |
|
You are the dirtist infighter going and you are shocked shocked by this? You selectively quoted from Powerline, leaving out nuggets like this that don't bode well for Mitt:
But the fact remains that, throughout the debate about Iraq, John McCain brought to the table an independence of judgment that Romney (and just about everyone else) did not. McCain refused to defer to the Defense Department when things were going badly in Iraq. Rather he kept advocating another approach – essentially the one that’s working now. And, though I doubt McCain would have advocated surging forever if the surge had been a clear failure, I think it’s fair to say that his commitment to the strategy ran deeper than Romney’s; certainly it was less tied to the judgment of the Bush administration
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/01/019642.php
Powerline also said this:
Florida governor endorses McCain
A few minutes ago, Florida's governor Charles Crist endorsed John McCain. The Florida primary has been truly too close to call until now, but I've got to believe it has just swung in McCain's favor.
The following statement contains a number of assumptions, but I think Crist's endorsement may prove to be the worst development of the day for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by Paul at 6:52 PM http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/01/019644.php |
|
|
|