Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Ken Blackwell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Reagan’s Coalition Still Vital
by Ken Blackwell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Now the race is down to John McCain and Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee. The conservative coalition is looking for one of them to take up the mantle of Ronald Reagan in truth, not just in name. If one of them does, he can win in November. If not, the next president of America will be a Democrat.

The only way a Republican can take the White House this year is if the GOP nominee both energizes his party base and also has strong crossover appeal for millions of swing voters. Only a Republican candidate who both secures his base and embodies change can win.

Many speak of the three-legged stool of the Reagan coalition: economic, social, and national security conservatives. But sometimes that metaphor doesn’t quite cut it.

There are more than three types of conservatives. Though they may all look alike to others, they are passionate about different priorities.

In reality, there are several key groups within conservatism. Among Senator McCain and Governors Romney and Huckabee, whoever can convince each element of this coalition that he is acceptable will unite the Republican Party.

Among social conservatives, the number one issue is definitely judges. Judicial nominations are the core motivator behind the pro-life movement, Christian conservatives, and — after the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment case — perhaps gun voters as well. Any nominee who does not take a clear, firm stand on nominating the right kind of judges will not win in November, as anywhere between four and 10 million conservative voters would stay home. As hard as this is for other Republicans to understand, this is an absolute deal breaker with millions of conservatives.

Christian conservative voters generally form the pro-life and traditional marriage crowd, and are also passionate about religious freedom, home schooling, and raising their children with their beliefs.

Millions of pro-life voters will not vote for anyone they perceive as uncommitted on life. Though their priorities include abortion funding, abstinence education, and stem cells, judges trump everything for them. They are essentially single issue on the federal courts.

Second Amendment voters can save or doom any election. Since the NRA started endorsing a president in 1980, the two times it refused to endorse the Republican, 1992 and 1996, are the two times Republicans lost. Bill Clinton himself said the NRA cost Al Gore the White House. In addition to legislation and regulation, this year the Supreme Court may become a top issue for them, as well.

Economic conservatives mainly care about two things: taxes and spending. Republican leaders have been fantastic on the first, and terrible on the second. Government regulation, tort reform, and health care are also issues.

Then there are philosophical conservatives. These people are committed to limited government, understanding that the Constitution only empowers the federal government to do certain things, leaving issues like public safety, health, and morality to the states.

Finally, there are national security conservatives. While they may divide over FISA and the Patriot Act, all are united in expanding and supporting our military and being on offense against radical Islamic terrorism.

Some will say all of these conservatives will simply come around at the end of the day. Don’t bet on it. However, if Hillary Clinton is the nominee she will indeed energize and motivate the Republican base. There are literally millions of conservatives who will not vote unless they perceive a candidate who welcomes them in the Republican Party and takes up their cause.

Others will say that a moderate ticket can pick up more votes in the middle than it would lose on the right. Dead wrong. Up to 10 million votes would be lost. And, some of the votes Republicans would lose are not just votes, they are the contributors and the grassroots forces. Without them, the Republican nominee cannot beat what will be a fiercely motivated Democratic Party.

It’s key to emphasize that the Republican nominee need not be the first choice for all of these groups. He does not need to be a crusader for them. He must simply be a friend, rather than neutral or — worse yet — an adversary.

The would-be nominee must simply be someone for whom each group says, “He’s not everything I hoped for, but he’s good enough that I’ll fight for him.” He must show that his agenda will reflect their core concerns, and never abandon those commitments in the face of a Democratic Congress for legislation, or a Democratic Senate for judicial confirmations.

The Republican nominee must do these things. If so, he may well lead a united party to win in November. If not, he will lose, and everything from the Supreme Court to taxes to spending to Iraq to Social Security to border security to health care will be lost as well.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Mr. Blackwell, a contributing editor at Townhall.com, is a senior fellow at the Family Research Council and American Civil Rights Union.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Ken Blackwell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
MCCain's Hombre


When I heard McCain's Hispanic Outreach guy was none other than Smiling Juan Hernandez, I knew John McCain has heard nothing we have had to say.


Smiling Juan Hernadez
We know who he is, we know his loyalties are to Mexico, we know he wants to erase our borders and immigration laws.

JOHN MCCAIN, YOU NEED A NEW HEARING AID

Smiling Juan Hernandez
In case you don't know him, he used to work for the Mexican govt., lately he has been shilling for "rights" for illegal aliens in this country. He has said he wants Mexicans to remain Mexicans even if they are living here. His loyalties are to Mexico, not U.S.



Questions for illegal alien apologists like John McCain:

Why does The National Council of the Race (la raza in spanish) and the Chamber of Commerce get to negotiate a "Comprehensive Shafting of The American Citizens" behind closed doors? Since when does an organization representing foreign nationals breaking our laws get to rewrite our immigration laws to suit the lawbreakers? Isn't this akin to allowing NAMBLA to rewrite our laws regarding child predators? Or allowing organized crime syndicates to rewrite racketeering, gambling, prostitution, and extortion laws?

We The People are being told by our representatives that we should sit down and shut up while they invite in the entire world. We The People should get some say in this matter. Another amnesty will set off a stampede like we have never seen before. There is not much time to save our country. All the 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 end is near, folks
The RINOS had already turned off conservatives in 2006, but THIS tears it! All the old man has going for him, assuming you agree about Iraq, is that. Otherwise, he is a card-carrying lib on many critical issues, and a quisling at best on scamnesty... America will disappear if we do not stanch and reverse the ILLEGAL invasion, but the equivocating McQuisling has no more desire to do that than Presidente Jorge Bush. Your Senate this week is working on further commitments to pay ILLEGALS your S.S.

I worked in Reagan's campaign and then for Daddy Bush, albeit less enthusiastically. I have voted Republican faithfully for almost 40 years, but McAmnesty will cause me to stay home. The left kept saying they feared him the most, just as Brer Rabbit kept tellin' Brer Fox not to throw him into that brier patch. He will lose worse than Bob Dole, probably considerably worse. Maybe then the Republicans will wise up and decide that they must stand for something different than the left-- McAmnesty does not truly do that. I expect neoCONS like most columnists here on TH to be satisfied with him, and they know that Shrillary would not close those 18 permanent bases in Iraq either, which was the REAL goal of the Saddam take-out that so few understand.

http://tvnewslies.org/html/pnac_neo-con_artists.html
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editoria ls/articles/2007/11/04/a_lazy_simplistic_analogy/
http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=2371

GOP-RIP?

The Stupid Party

The RNC wants an amnesty candidate.

Don't vote for one.

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 supporters 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

Hillary's Achilles Heel
Hillary is still singing the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" tune (all the Dems, really), not realizing it is her swan song.

The only issue I have ever seen 75-80% of Americans agree on is stopping illegal aliens. Any GOP candidate that is credible on this issue could win in a landslide.

The biggest problem is the RNC has sold it's soul to the cheap labor express. They are determined to nominate an amnesty candidate, even if it means losing the election. Stupid Party, indeed.

a consistant conservative
A consistant conservative is exactly what the GOP needs.Very Good Mr. Blackwell.The man you describe would be ideal to unite this lost and confused party because desperation is setting in ever tightly as the field narrows and still the one clear choice hasn't convinced the base.It seems the media and popular progressive attitude of superiority has pressured voters to find the perfect candidate.Yeah right! Most times people can't see the forest for the trees. The man who best fits this ideal mold for leadership wasn't slick enough,didn't give sermons and jokes as speeches,he wasn't a respected p.o.w ,he didn't often play well with Democrats,or hold the hand of the most famous American city.But he was 100% pro-life,pro 2nd amendment,small goverment,a federalist and believed in the constitution as the fore fathers had written it over 200 years ago knowing it would be forever timeless in principle. A man whose leadership became the most obvious when he spoke of the things he was the most passionate about.A man of depth,intelligence, faith,who believed if government was big enough to do anything for you,was big enough to take anything from you.A man who believed that the security of the American people was the most important thing.That man is Fred Thompson.

Romney's Swan Song
Romney wasn't happy about the criticism McCain leveled at him about timetables in Iraq. He said it was a dirty trick because it came days before Florida. Well, maybe so, but it should also serve as a comfort to nervous Republicans about McCain's ability to play hardball in the general. McCain may seem like a guy who likes to reach across the aisle but he's not afraid to get dirty. McCain will be a very clever general election candidate; it won't all be kumbaya with Clinton or Obama.

Romney's pushback, btw, that if this was an issue, then why didn't he raise it earlier, wasn't a great debate comeback moment. As I've noted before, Romney just doesn't come across well when he's angry.

Overall, Romney seemed simply ticked off. It was as if he realized the end was near and he didn't know how to stop it. He tried to go after McCain, politely mind you, but didn't trip the newly crowned frontrunner up.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/30/624574.as px

Virginia Patriot
Can not agree an anti amnesty candidate would go anywhere. There were 3 or 4 six months ago. They never totaled over20 per cent of the GOP primary vote. Apparently that 80 percent against amnesty was a mile wide and an inch deep. Short of a brokered convention, i see no chance of stopping the illegal alien flood anytime soon.

Gov Huckabee is the winner!
He wins the Debate:

http://ktracy.com/?p=829

Six Reasons here:

http://voteforhuckabee.blogspot.com/2008/01/five-reasons-hu ck-can-win-despite.html








GOP swan song
Zel Miller's party left him and mine is leaving me. McCain is not steamrolling, but due to stupid rules, and Evangelical fanatics, McCain is taking South Carolina (2/3 of her people voted against McAmnesty) with 33 percent, Florida nearly the same way, except surprise, the huge majority of Johns votes came from Cubans and Hispanics. Fred had no stomach for the fight. Only after Romney is gone and the Regan conservatives have left Huckabee in McCains dust will the true Republicans realize the GOP is gone.Many of us who believe in the rule of law, cannot vote Huckabee over destroying public property and states evidence. If outgoing Gov. Blount did that here in Missouri where he is being sued by a former staffer, he would be hung. Only in the home of Hillary and Tucker, do we have this level of corruption!
http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list- washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2007

Goodbye GOP, Hello Unites States of Mexico. Mike you finished behind Rudy in Fla. Give up the delusion and mend fences with Romney. What could a Romney/Huckabee ticket do? How about keep Hillary out of the Casa Blanca? How about stop McCain-Kennedy? Otherwise we nominate a Republican McGovern candidate, then when the Dems have full control, "The Great Society" will look like a kids game. Wake up Republicans!!

Romney, McCain clash on conservative val
GREAT VIDEO

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/who-won-the-debate

Joe
Romney is a decent man; McCain is NOT. Romney is civil, and that is something we need. McCain curses the GOP base and his fellow Senators in public, and we should all be tired of dolts like McCain, but maybe we just enjoy punishment and secretly pray for the demise of the USA which folks like John McCain are eager to bring on (in McCain's case, I'll give him the benefit of ignorance).
McCain, Joe, has not criticized Romney; he has told blatant LIES about Romney...easily verifiable LIES (even anderson Cooper who I can't stand read McCain the actual "time table" quote, and McCain still stuck with his LIE making the guy a truely sinister figure devoid of good character, but maybe we all want another Nixon 'cause that is exactly what we will get in McCain), and McCain doesn't just tell single LIES, the man is nothing but LIES.
McCain has a record, that most intelligent Republicans know and hate, and Romney has debted this record, and this is criticism; there IS a difference.
I've now decided that if the GOP delivers McCain as its Presidential nominee, I'm not voting third party, I'm voting Democrat!

Mitt Romney Rocks
Hooyah Romney!! Mitt Romney was strong on the economy last night, stands for school vouchers, and stands FOR the Federal Marriage Protection Act. Romney pointed out that McCain's carbon tax and environmental regulation will force American business to move to China to escape over-regulation and over-taxation. Average American will pay $1,000 a year more in gas taxes if McCain Lieberman ever passed. McCain doesn't require Chinese business to sign on first. Simply clueless on economic issues!

McCain voted against Bush's tax cuts twice in 2001, but said it was because there wasn't simultaneous spending cuts. But Reagan raised spending BIG TIME during the 80s when McCain voted FOR Reagan's tax cuts. McCain said in 2001 that the rich would benefit too much from tax cuts, so he voted against them, before he flip-flopped and now says he's for making them permanent!! His explanation was LAME!!! McCain voted against Federal Marriage Protection Act.

http://politicaljunkyfood.blogspot.com/

btw, Huckabee is against school vouchers, pardoned a thousand criminals and a dozen murders (more than tripling Clint's pardons as Governor of Arkansas!) and raised taxes by nearly 600 million in Arkansas. The 'third rail' in Republican politics is raising taxes or voting against tax cuts.

Isn't it interesting
that if the republican candidate simply approached the job and the work of the federal government within the scope of the constitution, as it was intended, all of these concerns (what we call "issues) would be taken care of.

maggie
You are correct!

America is going to pay dearly because it wasn't mature or wise enough to see past the Hollywood glitz and glamour of the presidency and put a man in office who had real character and substance.

Sederoff
Amen. 1/3 of those voting Republican in three states have made a decision that the rest of us will have to live with. We will not have an option to vote for Hunter, Tancredi, Thompson or Guliani, and by the time Super Tuesday is done, very likely for Romney as well. What we will get, apparently, is another flyboy who benefitted from the silver spoon handed to him by his father. He did poorly in college/academy, as did Bush, stated that he knew little about economics, seeming to mirror Bush's disinterest in the economy for the first six years, and has demonstrated that he is impulsive and aggressive, which also seems to mirror Bush's personality. Both Bush and McCain were collaberators on the two attempts to pass an amnesty bill, and neither showed any interest in securing the Southern border, undermining their claims to be strong on national security and demonstrating only that party politics trumps security. Bush misread Iraq in part because his knowledge and understanding of history was shallow, and there's little to suggest that McCain brings anything more to the table.

This election mirrors the election in 2000 when Bush was crowned after the first handful of primaries. The civics teachers among us will tell us that we now have a duty to endorse the decisions made by a small minority of voters in these first few states.

Only in politics do we allow such a small minority to make decisions for the rest that the remainder may not believe to be in their interest - and then lectured if we don't go along.

And, if we endorse this process, the process will never change.

The stool has collapsed
I’m sorry Ken, but there are actually 4 people left in the race for the Republican nomination. Those are Romney, McCain, Huckabee, and Ron Paul. As for Reagan’s three legged stool that you wish to add the add other conservatives to, that too is long gone. Imagine that stool if you will with the legs as the “named group” and the runners between the legs as “conservative”. The fact that they hard “conservative holds them all together and makes them a unit.

The key fact of that is that they must first be conservative. In order to be a modern conservative the individual must meet several criteria:

1. First and foremost, he must be a follower of free market capitalism and he must find that although government regulation is sometimes necessary, that when it is used it must be the minimum amount.

2. He must believe that socialism is anathema to liberty and must oppose it in all of its forms. He must support and push for private property, including low taxes and low government spending.

3. He must support a strong military at the same time that his foreign policy is only for that which advances American interests.

4. He must support and defend the Constitution as it is written with NO EXCEPTIONS and he must be willing to push for judges who do the same.

I could go on but we have a 2000 character limit and the last item really takes care of a LOT of other problems. But the bottom line here Ken is that NONE of the candidates based on their past record meets the above criteria.

So if you pull out the “conservative” supports, the legs of the stool fold and collapse.

who sullied the punch bowl?
I have been morose since McAmnesty took Fl., but the left was gonna' win anyway. Presidente Jorge has stunk it up so badly (profligate war on the wrong bad Islamics, embracing ILLEGALS, growing govt./spending $ like a drunken sailor 'Crat, general fecklessness) that it has become a question of how big the blowout will be. RINOS like Jorge still control the party of Reagan now.

I disagree with some who imagine that McQuisling has the best chance to win for conservatives... I think that the left has cleverly pushed that a la Brer Rabbit just as the open border ilk opines that we cannot deport 12 million, which is a false choice-- we don't have to deport anybody-- just enforce the law, and they would repatriate attritively. When Howard Wolfson tells you that McAmnesty would be their foremost challenger, better grab your wallet. McAmnesty talks tough about terror even as hugs the left on other key issues, especially surrendering America to ILLEGALS. A Hobson's Choice again... been there, done that with Presidente Jorge.

Mr. Blackwell's blackout...
--
Ah, the Family Research Council.

Faunching for "Government as Daddy" to contrast themselves against the Democrat Party's vision of "Government as Mommy."

Well, hell, Ken. You might be excused the demonstration of brain damage.

For the rest of us, however, there's yet a Republican candidate (who, unlike opportunistic weasels like Giuliani et alia, *WILL* stay in the race all the way through to November) championing every aspect of the conservative base -

(1) Social conservatives

(2) Fiscal conservatives

(3) Pro-life conservatives

(4) "Second-Amendment voters"

(5) Economic conservatives

(6) Philosophical conservatives

(7) *REAL* "national security conservatives" (as opposed to neocon "Cops of the World" clowns)

That candidate, of course, is Ron Paul.

Win or lose (and with McCain, the Republican Party *WILL* lose, no matter how much us conservatives hate Mocha Marvin and The Woman With One Eyebrow; McCain is about as "dynamic" an "mobilizing" as that three-weeks-old bowl of half-eaten oatmeal I found under my grandson's bed a couple of days ago), unless the Republican Party proves that the last seven years of betrayal under the auspices of Bush II was something which the GOP repents, you can kiss the future of the Republican Party good-bye.

We need a Goldwater '64 campaign, not yet another "Rockefeller Republican" Dole '96 exercise in insipid stupidity.

If we *MUST* lose the White House this year, let's do it on a note that sets us up for a conservative victory in the future.

To hell with McCain. We need Ron Paul.

--

McCain
doesn't need to tell lies about Romney, he's told enough of them on his own. He is a dishonest used car salesman that is trying to run from his liberal record in Massachusetts and snooker enough people in the process to move into the whitehouse.

http://massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/#top

One things sure
If a republican president wanna be expects to get the conservative voters to cast a ballot, then he had better be damn tough on illegals.

There may not be much noise about the illegals now, but it is still in the minds of republicans & the few democrats still in existance.

You're part of the problem, Ken
Dr. Paul is winning delegates in caucus States, not machine-counted States. 2nd in NV, 1st or 2nd in LA and he will do well in MT and ME.

This will be a brokered convention and Dr. Paul has the money to go the distance.

And as far as conservatism, no one else can match up to Dr. Paul. I think you incorrectly statte that true conservatives support the offensive war on terror. Sure, we want no terror. Dr. Paul voted to go after Osama Bin Laden. Where is he?

What happened to the Just War Theory? Our constitutional declaration of wars? THIS is conservative and THIS is why I support Dr. Paul.

veteran

litmus test for McAmnesty
"Straight Talk" Express Positions:

1) Buddies up with far lefties Feingold and Teddy
the Swimmer... admires Shrillary
2) Opposed tax cuts, and Justice Alito as "too
conservative"
3) Sponsored the Scamnesty Bill and tried to kill
anti-ILLEGAL initiatives in Az., and calls 74%
of America "racist and xenophobic" for
opposing it
4) Favors neoCON agenda of staying in Iraq
forever, even as it costs us $7 billion per
month already
5) Is fighting currently to give your S.S. to
ILLEGALS (Jorge will sign it)

McAmnesty a conservative?! He is an open border, neoCON, RINO!!! Been there done that with Presidente Jorge! Another Hobson's Choice in the making as Reagan's party morphs ineluctably into RINOS.

Some variety?
I just noticed that the comments here and on Towery's article are almost identical for the first few comments. One is definitely a cut and paste, another is just very similar wording.

I know some people believe if they repeat the same thing often enough we will hear them, but, honestly, by repeating yourself over and over you just bore and annoy most readers.

We are political junkies here, we tend to read most of the articles on the site. if you cut and paste, or just repeat yourself, we notice. And it bores and annoys us.

Please, a little variety.

CONSERVATIVE QUANDARY
THE STARS ARE ALIGNED FOR MCCAIN

..... As far as McCain is concerned the Moon was in the seventh house and Jupiter aligned with Mars ...I don't know if McCain is an Aquarius but eveything has gone right for him and everything has gone wrong for Romney and now it looks like the GOP elites are setting McCain up for a Coronation ...

.....Romney's strategy of spending time and money in the early States worked about as well as Rudy's strategy of lying in the weeds in Florida ...Huckabee's charm and wit gave Mitt the silver in Iowa and Bhutto's assassination set fire to McCain who ended up with all of Giuliani's supporters including Governor Crist ...

.....Giuliani dropping out helps McCain while Huckabee and Paul staying in hurts Romney because they split the conservative vote ...with the power structure elites coalesing behind McCain with endorsements, Crist, Giuliani and Arnold, the situation looks dire for Romney ...

.....If the GOP and RNC knows what is good for them ...they had better convince McCain to get off his high horse and reach out to Conservatives or else he will go the way of Bob Dole .....COLOSSUS

IMPRESSIONS OF THE DEBATE

...HUCKABEE ...The most witty and likeable

...PAUL ...The most logical and sincere

...MCCAIN ...The most arogant and smug

...ROMNEY ...The most businesslike and distant

.....Analysis: What Romney lacks is the warmth that made Reagan so loveable ...when Reagan would be attacked he would go into his aw shucks mode and say 'there you go again' and the people loved it ...when Romney is attacked he trys to argue the point and seems defensive ...

.....If McCain wants to be President he had better have a "come to Jesus born again epiphany" and reach out to the Conservative base or they will desert him in droves ...

.....Ron Paul's problem is that the Constitution is his Bible and most voters have been turned on to the siren song of the Socialists and have turned their backs on the freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution ...

.....Huckabee is suffering from the legacy of GW and his "Compassionate Conservatism" ...the voters are still licking their wounds from the Bush betrayal and are not going to go down that road again ...right now the Huck is playing the role of a spoiler and possible power broker ...the longer he stays in the race ...the more he helps McCain .....COLOSSUS

BTW: ANDREWS ...I you see paste up repeats just scroll on by ...you are not obligated to read them again ...

When the dust settles after November 2nd
Conservatives will find another Democratic Administration has been voted into office. My guess is the contest will be Clinton-Obama Vs McCain Huckabee. Either way we wind-up with Democrats running the country!

Well, all I have to say is
if McCain gains the nomination I'll be voting for either the libertarian or constitution party candidates. The fact is that when McCain proposed his amnesty for criminals he stabbed every legal resident and citizen of the United States in the back. He did it with a glib smile and a shake with one hand while the stiletto slid in the back with the other. He may have sacrificed greatly for this country 30 odd years ago but today he's a treasonous scumbag who's only thought is the destruction of this country under the guise of "compassion" for everybody but his constituants...you know the ones that pay his salary.

I Can't Vote for McCain
I could vote for Romney, Huckabee, or even Ron Paul, but if McCain gets the nomination, I'll vote Libertarian without remorse. And the LP has invited Ron Paul to run for its nomination if the GOP fails to nominate him. So, I might be voting for Dr. Paul after all.

elephant in the room...
Another inane posting from Mr. Blackwell, the guy who conveniently ignores the elephant in the room. Newsflash to Kenny... the GOP *does* have one (and only one) candidate in the race is complies with every single one of your stated criteria for conservative voters: pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, pro-Constitution, 100% for limited government, and certainly wouldn't tolerate activist judges. That's Ron Paul. Every other candidate has very liberal stances on at least some of these issues and will not get the core conservatives out there... even against Hillary.

Of course, there is that implication that a GOP candidate must be strong on national security and in the war on terror and "Islamofascism" or whatever the inane propaganda buzzword is. Unfortunately, many GOP voters are so dumbed down, they believe that you need to invade countries that pose no threat to us to be "strong" against terror and "pro-military."

Here are a few inconvenient truths for these not so bright Republican voters: Ron Paul got more money from the military than any candidate in Q3. Obama was second. Both are anti-war. Military personnel seem to realize that national defense is not national offense.

Furthermore, if you support FISA or the Patriot (sic) Act, that automatically disqualifies you from being a small government conservative. Period. Or maybe you'll trust Hillary to use sneak and peek powers with the utmost integrity.

The Republicans with IQs > 90 are leaving the party in droves. At this rate, the party will have nothing left but a few certifiable idiots who want nothing but the Rapture.

The GOP deserves to die unless something miraculous happens.

Ken Blackwell's thoughts
are right on the money. I am a Republican Woman and volunteer starting with the Nixon campaign long ago. I listened to the debate wondering who I should support after Rudy declined. After hearing the belligerent and selfish McCain, and seeing how old he looks, he will not win against the Dems. There are many who will not vote for either Obama or Hillary and will vote for
Republican. I think this morning that it is between Huckabee and Romney. There are a lot of delegates out there, go get 'em guys! Get gutsy!
So many real issues to address, so quit the personal attacks.

Bear237

More than 4 left
Vic/maggie/et al,
There is STILL another option - Alan Keyes.
He is the definition of the man we on the Right side of the aisle need and are DESPERATE for in this "race" for the White House. He worked with and for Mr. Reagan and has the knowledge, experience and backbone to be THE conservative voice in this country.
Check him out - http://www.alankeyes.com - and write him in on Tuesday if necessary.

The three little legs.
Very good article. This time around it comes down to who is the best of the worst, the lesser of 4 evils. McPinnocio is definately the worst. I do not do RINO's. Quite frankly the Rep. elite are all pushing for him. Broken Washington stumping for a broken Washington insider. They are just fighting for power, not conservatism. Definately a Mc Cain win is a loss for the so called Reagan coalition. Why can't we just call it what it has been for 100's of years. Reagan didn't start it. George Washington and the gang of signers started it. Did G.Washington and the founding fathers fight and give everything for their own power? NO! They fought for freedom to all and conservative values, those three little legs. If we vote just to stay in power the Rep. party has no cause, we loose. We might as just as well be Democrates. Rudy said Tuesday night, :Elections are about fighting for a cause." What cause are we fighting for? Conservatism? Power? Liberalism? Compromise? Without fighting for the cause that the Republican party is founded for and known for, we loose. Without a cause will we cease to exist and fall apart as nothing? What kind of party will we leave our children? Just another Liberal Party fighting for power?
Power corrupts, and ultimate power corrupts ultimately. Fighting just for power means Washington will stay corrupt as usual.

Steadfastness: McCain YES
When the Iraq War looked lost, when BOTH Democrats and Republicans were telling Bush to adopt the Iraq Study Group recommendations for a face-saving veneer atop defeat, McCain stood fast for victory.

McCain pushed for a surge in Iraq even before Bush did. He did so while Romney was still hunting around for a convenient political position based on polls and focus groups.

McCain bet his political career and his reputation, and his entire political life, on that seemingly hopeless and unpopular position.

And he was right.

That tells me that McCain has the courage, the steadfastness, and the vision to win the War on Terror, without Romney's pollsters, focus groups, lawyers, and media consultants.

If Romney had been in charge, he would have done the politically expedient thing instead.

That clinches it for me.

McCain is the one.

PRESIDENT MCCAIN!!!

for lodestar
lodestar writes: "All the old man has going for him, assuming you agree about Iraq, is that."

But that's a lot.

In 2004, the GOP said that the War on Terror is the defining issue of our entire civilization. That the election MUST turn on who can best win the War on Terror.

And now in 2008, I'm going to hold you Republicans to your claim. You're NOT going to welch on Iraq or terrorism this year, just because your favorite candidate this year isn't relatively strong on those issues.

You made the War on Terror the defining issue in 2004.

And I'm going to insist you keep it that way in 2008.

And that's the issue on which my choice for President will be made.

McCain: The only candidate who had the idea for the Iraq Surge even before Bush did. And who bet his entire political future on what seemed to be a highly unpopular and perhaps even hopeless venture.

versus

Romney: Who kept trying to dodge the Iraq issue until his polls and focus groups could suggest a politically convenient position for him to take.


Can't trust Romney
Mitt Romney has succeeded in convincing me that he will attach himself to any position to achieve his current goal.
When he wanted to be Governor of Massachusetts he ran away from Ronald Reagan, and pro-choice (because of his mother's influence according to his own words).
Now he wants to be the Republican nominee for President and he's leeching onto the Reagan legacy and is anti-abortion (guess he threw Mom's values overboard)
Maybe even he doesn't know what he really believes but I don't want a President who's still going through an identity crisis that most of us worked through in our 20s.

Huck most like Ronald Reagan
Just like the media, I was more focused on the confrontations between McCain and Romney during the debate. I didn't notice Huckabee's similarities to Ronald Reagan until the last question - "would Ronald Reagan endorse you?". Rather than talk about himself, Huck took the opportunity to talk about his admiration for Reagan. Reagan had a wonderful personality and was funny. Those likable qualities were the reason that he was popular and electable, even more important than his policies.

Sorry Nancy
but for every Mitt flip, there is a McCain flop so get over it. Reagan was well out of office by the time Romney ran for Gov of Mass, and much of the mudslinging directed about his tenure as Gov are verifiable LIES.
If the most conservative person in the world became President but had a Democrat controlled Congress (majority House, filibuster-proof Senate) he'd be right where Romney was as Gov of Mass, and on most issues he would have little chance of undoing the will of the Congress.
On the other hand, you can tell the class of Romney and the lack of Class of McCain, who has proven beyond any doubt of late that he is NO principled leader! The man can't admit an untruth when a moderator beats him over the head with the truth.
McCain brings little, if anything, to the table on economic accumen, and ouor nation is at the precipice of a great economic fall.
McCain is spiteful, vicious, arrogant, stubborn (beyond belief), paranoid, and an unrepentant liar....he is like the darker side of Nixon!
McCain will continue with every opportunity to damage this country and the future of her CITIZENS...Not residents, legal or otherwise, but CITIZENS.

SteveL
as much as McCain must lie in declaration, "the surge" was NOT his plan; it was a part of the Petraeus plan! Herein, is a great danger of a McCain in the Whitehouse...he thinks he knows everything about everything and would be likely to interfere with the military professionals based upon his knowledge (which he gained where? commanding a naval fighter wing...hahahaha...do you realize how much leadership, much less management, that takes...how many people were under his direction? FEWER than he likes to claim). McCain is dangerous in temperment, and of late as revealed, character; the man is a LIAR. I went through the Nixon lies; I don't want more.
Also, McCain has NOT been the only supporter of Petraeus' strategy and tactics, most ALL GOP Senators have vocally supported it. McCain just has this messianic complex or something about being the only one.

GOP battles thus far
McCain has been rejected by about 2/3rds of the voters in every election thus far, and that's with the support of Independents and cross-over Dems in some cases; how can he claim the leadership mantle?
He nows leads Romney in delegate count only because he managed a 36% win in a winner take all primary (let's not even recall that massive 33% endorsement he received by South Carolina voters).
I predict that Romney will defeat McCain in CA; he might even come close to taking AZ from McNASTY. McCain will get help from yet more "less than a majority" wins in "winner takes all" primaries like NY and some more states that he hasn't a hope of carrying in a general election. As far as I'm concerned, if a state was "red" in the preceeding Pres election, then I think they deserve a "bump" in delegates in the next Pres primary elections; I'm tired of "blue" states getting more of a say than solid "red" states in selecting the GOP nominee.
IF McCain is the GOP nominee, he'll loose in a landslide, even if Hillary is his opponent, and the GOP in the US House will loose more seats than in 2006 and the US Senate will gain a filibuster-proof Dem majority.
People like myself, and those I know, are ready to leave the GOP if McCain gains the party's nomination. I shall not remain in a party whose standard bearer has had the audacity to call me, a fellow Republican, a xenophobe, racists, and other degrading titles because I disagreed with the man on an issue! He showed his true self when he cursed fellow GOP Senators in public!

not my words, but the truth
"Sen. John McCain is no conservative. He opposed the Bush tax cuts. He sponsored the greatest lasting crackdown on political speech in American history with campaign finance reform. He allies himself with radical environmentalists. He's an open-borders advocate on immigration. He voted against the constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage. He cobbled together the Senate's Gang of 14, which stifled the appointment of strict constructionists to the federal bench. His pro-life rhetoric is lukewarm at best."

I would add that the man has shown himself to be an unrepentant LIAR.

Not our Friends.
Let's all keep in mind that Iraq and Afghanistan have become nation building exercises. The surge was a response to the failed policy of stay the course. But the failure of stay the course has had ramifications that have tied up our forces, and will do so for years. While we are tied down with security obligations in these two countries, the war on terror in fact is being prosecuted on a global scale by the police and intelligence forces of many countries, not just ours.

The next President's hands are almost entirely tied by our obligations to these countries. The idea of electing a President who is "strong" on the war on terror seems to be a misnomer. We don't have the forces to invade a third country, leaving us only to hold Iraq and Afghanistan together while we work with the International community - which any one of these candidates is certain to do. Staying in Iraq is essential, but the great irony is that it doesn't equally mean that Iraq will now, or in the future, contribute anything meaningful to our own national security. Saddam's gone, but he's been replaced by a Shia Clerical state. The Shia parties are all beholden to the clerics, who are hostile to the West - and to Americans. Right now the enemy of our enemy is our friend, but there's a lot of delusion going around that seems to want to believe that when that enemy is gone - everyone will remain friends. They're Arabs, the Secularists are gone, the Christians are almost gone, and the Jews are entirely gone. Their blood and religious ties are to the Irani's, Syrians, and Hamas in Lebanon - not to us. They are what they are. And will be again as soon as they have the opportunity. Count on it.

The War on Terror is now in another phase. The war we need to fight now, is here at home. It's economic - and we're losing it. Don't lose sight of that fact.

the GOP must go...
the way of the Whigs. They no longer stand for conservative principles. They stand for empowering government, infringing on civil liberties, spending us into oblivion, and the very nation-building they used to excoriate.

I might even prefer a Dem. At least the Dems are honest about wanting to shred the Constitution, spending us into oblivion, and nation-building.

al
"the GOP must go the way of the Whigs. They no longer stand for conservative principles."

That's what the Buchannanites said sixteen years ago. Two years later, the Republicans took control of Congress for the first time in forty years, running on an openly conservative agenda. Even Slick Willie was forced to make a dramatic turn to the right.

Take a deep breath and get ahold of yourself.




History repeats itself...
...except this time, farce preceded tragedy.

Yes, SteveL, McCain is right on the war. But nothing else, and not even all of that.

The fool would close Guantanamo and graciously confer Constitutional rights on the murdering vermin held there when what we should be doing is extracting whatever information they have before affording them the rest of their Geneva Convention rights: a firing squad. This is not hyperbole: this is what you are expected and allowed to do to illegal combatants in order to discourage the practice. "Three hots and a cot" only gets you more of the same. And the guards can take those stupid gloves off when handing out library books: when they see you treating their Mein Kampf like an uber-sacred object, they don't think they've won; they KNOW it.

I voted for Alan Keyes the last time the Republican Party seemed hell-bent on nominating Bob Dole. Since it looks like they'll be doing that again -- and in a big way -- it sure looks like I'll be doing that again too. Though the party is repeating their error, I shall not: I voted for their candidate in November of '96, but I won't this time.

Understand and learn: I've been an unwaveringly loyal customer for 32 years, and I'm switching brands. Can you comprehend how many people you've lost if you've also lost me? Look around the table, o RNC, and see all that is left.

Now, where does the line for the National Conservative Party start?

VOTE FOR FRED
Fred Thompson has withdrawn from the race for president. Fred Thompson is still our choice. Fred Thompson, a young attorney working for the justice department, hand picked by Ronald Reagan, helped defend some of our choices to vote for “the Republican,” Richard Nixon. Fred Thompson, as a senior Republican diplomat, left us with a coherent interpretation of our conservative views. Fred Thompson gave us a conservative focus that allowed us to find a new interpretation of ourselves as Republicans. Fred crafted thoughts and opinions into simple effective coherent statements and published those, point by point on his website as a primer to assist in finding our way as a nation. Fred has set an example and laid the groundwork for the next generation Conservative.

Fred Thompson’s withdrawal from the race for president is not about your pain or your anger; we’ve all been there at one time or another. This is about us and our mutual decision to choose Fred Thompson, a committed conservative to lead. Fred owes us nothing. We don’t owe Fred. We do have a responsibility to ourselves to be responsible for our own decisions. We can’t blame someone else if we are not happy.

Fred Thompson is still on the ballot in many if not all states. Fred Thompson is still a viable choice for president. This is chess not checkers. A unified vote would give Fred the choice at the convention and would prevent second choices from looking more powerful than they deserve.

The right to choose cost some of our fellow citizens, countrymen and family the ultimate price. Our price for our right to choose based on our principals is one vote.

VOTE FOR FRED…

Dennis McIntire, “The Constituent”
http://www.dennisforlife.com


Nancy, that's absolute nonsense!
"Mitt Romney has succeeded in convincing me that he will attach himself to any position to achieve his current goal."

The real "flip flopper" in this race is none other than John McCain.

McCain reversed himself on abortion, the Bush tax cuts, illegal immigration, the fence and he has tried to equivicate on McCain-Feingold. He now praises Samuel Alito, but originally he said he was "too conservative". That should tell you something.

McCain is using the standard Democrat trick of blaming your opponent for whatever unsavory thing you are doing yourself. For example McCain calls Romney a flip flopper when he is far more guilty of flip flopping. He also calls out Romney for negative ads when it is he who attacks Romney's character in his ads (Romney's ads have been issue based, not personality based).

You say you don't trust Romney but McCain is a proven liar.

WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING NANCY?

Let's not Forget
The illustrious “Fearless Leader” McCain is also in favor of closing Guantanamo and bringing all Islamic terrorists inside our boarders to be tried like citizens of the United States! Can anyone spell Prison Break? And by the way, he considers water-boarding (a technique we use to train our own troops) to be torture! So much for Rambo McCain.

"openly conservative agenda"
Yes, Ken, Buchanan was wrong in 1992. What he attributed to the party was true then only of its president, and in 1994, with the bad taste of Clinton's first term in their mouths, the voters raised up Newt Gingrich.

That is not happening now. The "openly conservative agenda" that brought victory in '94 is paid only lip service by the "leading" candidates today if it is not openly disdained. Who is 2010's Newt? Maybe we'll find out in 2009. And maybe there isn't one.

Why are so many primaries "winner take all"? Because the brokered convention was seen as something to be avoided. Well, folks, this is the result. Two out of three voters rejects McCain; McCain wins all the delegates. Brilliant!

I pray for a brokered convention now. I want the knives out and blood in the aisles. I want ALL of the remaining "first tier" (whoever first applied that phrase should die and rot in hell) to be so badly damaged that even they all agree that NONE of them can run. Then and only then would they be able to select and acclaim a candidate that can appeal to ALL conservatives.

I don't know who. Maybe someone like.........



http://www.Fred08.com

AND
McQuack IS NOT IT!

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/text/crimevictims.htm l
Free Ramos and Compean
If we can not have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
YES I am still writing Fred’s name in the box!
NO MORE HOLDING OUR NOSE AND PULLING THAT LEVER!!
VOTE FOR A REAL REPUBLICAN!! NO MORE RINO’s!!!

SteveL writes:
McCain stood fast for victory.

It is the only thing he EVER STOOD for, other than lib ideals!

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/text/crimevictims.htm l
Free Ramos and Compean
If we can not have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
YES I am still writing Fred’s name in the box!
NO MORE HOLDING OUR NOSE AND PULLING THAT LEVER!!
VOTE FOR A REAL REPUBLICAN!! NO MORE RINO’s!!!

Ken is exactly right!
McCain will lose some Republican votes because he is soft in illegal immigration.

He will lose some Republican votes because of the "gang of 14".

He will lose some republican votes because he opposes drilling in ANWAR which we really need to do to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil.

He will lose some Republican votes because he wants to impose a 50 cent / gallon gas tax for "global warming" which is simply a crock.

He will lose some Republican votes because of McCain Feingold.

He will lose some Republican votes due to the "Keeting 5 scandal".

He will lose some Republican votes because he is not competent to be POTUS as evidenced by his desire to close Guantanomo and the utterly STUPID bills that carry his name.

He will lose some Republican votes for the simple reason that he is an arrogant a*s and a lot of us simply can't stand the guy.

Choices
Life consists of making choices, literally from birth to death. There is no Law of the Universe mandating that every choice is between good and bad. Sometimes the choice is between bad and worse, e.g. McCain vs Obama. And sometimes the choice is between bad and evil, e.g. McCain vs Hillary. There is also the choice of doing nothing, but this also has consequences. In fact, applied to the above two cases, the choice of doing nothing is exactly equivalent to choosing the worse or choosing the evil. Life does not consist of getting everything one wants. Deal with it, folks, and stop whining!

Steve
You think McCain was the author of "the surge".

I think he is simply trying to take credit for the real genius behind it: General Petraeus.

McCain is good at taking credit for other peoples ideas and work. He paints himself as a great leader.

GIVE ME A BREAK! He was a military fighter pilot and a "middle manager". Not exactly the admiral of the fleet!

the constituent
a paid McCain consultant.
the greatest compliment a "fredhead" can pay to Fred Thompson is to vote for Mitt Romeny in opposition of McCain, the maverick.
get a serious grip.

buzzkat, you're right...
"Life does not consist of getting everything one wants."

I remember Barry Goldwater, I think he was right. He didn't win though.

I would like to see the Republican party not COMMIT SUICIDE!

I think McCain IS POLTICAL SUICIDE AND WILL RESULT IN PRESIDENT HILLARY.

buzzcat
a vote for the GOP should McCain be the Presidential candidate would be no different from voting Democratic. Given McCain vs a Democrat, there is NO choice other than boycott or voting third party (which might be the very thing the conservative wing of the GOP should do).
No one is whining other than those who would have conservatives once again go to the polls and vote for the lesser of two evils; I did that in 2004!


wally you forgot to mention...
He will lose some Republican votes because he has shown a willingness to distort the truth in the pattern of a far left Liberal.

add also...He will lose Republican votes because...

He is a bad tempered,one armed, jack o latern faced, vindictive, midget with a grating voice and manner. :)

buzzkat
I'm not whining. I'm promising.

"Vote for me! My opponent is worse!"

How inspiring.

If John McCain...
If John McCain is the only Republican who can beat the Democrats in 2008, as many are now saying; the Republicans and America are in deep trouble. The Democrats and MSM are just thrilled that McCain just might end up with the Republican Nomination. They can’t lose…

Both Dole and McCain are war heroes who are genuine patriots; however, the political atmosphere they both found themselves in is surely not patriotic. It has become a corrupted, self-serving, etc., etc. unpatriotic system that must be changed. Else, America will continue its slow decline into oblivion.

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst…I urge you to V-O-T-E…else you have no right to complain!

I like the idea of drafting Thompson & Newt; however, they both have some negatives that the “Clinton Machine” would love to grind-up and spit-out. Do not think they would enjoy the task of taking on the “Evil Ones”. But then who would??

All I'm saying....
....is that NOTHING is worse than Hillary! Hillary is evil personified. Hillary is the American reincarnation of the ultimate Communist mother hen b*tch Elena Ceausescu. Not even 1000 John McCains would be worse than one Hillary. Throw a spoiled kid temper tantrum ("MY conservative candidate didn't win, therefore I'm staying home - sniff sniff) - this attitude seems to be endemic with SOCIAL conservatives who are every bit as pro-intrusive government as the screechiest liberals IMO - and you'll end up with the worst possible outcome. I couldn't care less if whiny conservatives literally take a gun and shoot themselves in the foot; this hurts only themselves. But the better analogy in the case of this election is strapping a bomb on yourself and setting it off in a crowded mall; you hurt FAR more than merely your whiny selves. But fine by me, I don't give a sh*t. I'll do what I need to do to protect myself if Elena Ceausescu becomes President. Maybe this nation deserves no more than four or eight years of Hillary-Pelosi-Reid.

To Be A Conservative
To be a conservative republican we cannot let John McCain win the nomination. McVain is just to liberal. I like Mike Huckabee but feel that
he cannot unite all the republicans. That leaves Mitt Romney whom I believe is just conservative enough to pull everyone together.
I don't think Billary will get the democratic
nomination because she is a Clinton and we need
no more of them. I am a Gun believer whom does not think you turn the other cheek. Our Federal
judges must live by the Constitution. And last we must have a strong military ( we all know what billy boy did ).

Charles Martel
""Vote for me! My opponent is worse!"

How inspiring."


Hasn't this literally been the case in most American elections?


Love your handle by the way - the first great anti-Islam hero.

Vote your principals
Vote your principals, GIVE FRED DELAGATES IN THE CONVENTION, no need to waste the signs, keep them up as a symbol of principal. We now have a responsibility to choose again, as for me, I’m going to vote for Fred if his name is on the ballot.

Sticking to our guns and strength and standing by Fred now costs one vote. The campaign for the White House was about us, not Fred. The campaign for the White House was about who we chose to lead, not the available choices. Give Fred the delegates in the convention to symbolize our conviction to our principals, not for Fred, for us.

We can always join the Alamo, Fred is the only candidate that none of the empowered candidates want in the race. Our best choice in this race is still Fred, he has my respect for not denigrating the process into the “American Idol” format. Sanjaya Malakar is not my choice for president.

The right to choose cost some of our fellow citizens, countrymen and family the ultimate price. Our price for our right to choose based on our principals is one vote.

VOTE FOR FRED…

Dennis McIntire, “The Constituent”
http://www.dennisforlife.com


McCain
My fellow writers, Wake Up! the only choice we have now is John McCain.
Yes, you are right about his attitude
to be hard towards people sometimes.
I believe with pray and God's help, John will change fast, and especially with a good running mate that could keep John focus on the issues of today in this country of ours. We need all to pray, and we need a pro-life president again, to finish the work in saving lives of unborn babies that never have a chance to grow up here in US to change our country. My friends one of these unborn babies may be the one who that God may have plan to be president. We will never know, only if we will stop the killing of unborn babies.

By Bro. Nick

The Constituent, You'te out of your MIND
"Vote your principals, GIVE FRED DELAGATES IN THE CONVENTION,"

That's not a bad thought except for the fact that it is entirely self-defeating!

At this point, a vote for Fred is a vote for McCain.

The only HOPE of having any choice in the convention is to keep McCain from locking up the nomination BEFORE the convention.

The only way of doing that now is to vote for Romney so that both McCain and Romney have enough delegates to make the convention mean something. Otherwise, you're just screwed.

Bro.nick YOU'RE DREAMING!
If you're goal is to save the unborn, you're riding the wrong horse. Mitt Romney is far conservative than McCain when it comes to issues of that sort.

buzzkat
Yes, but usually there has been more on offer than just the menace of the opponent.

Every time I try to imagine voting for McCain -- and believe me, I've tried -- I start with "well, at least he's strong on..." before I have to remind myself how he's not. The War? Close Guantanamo. Judges? The Gang of 14. Taxes? "I voted no before I voted yes." Spending and the economy? "Let's fight global warming!" Free speech? McCain-somebody. Border security? McCain-somebody else. It would be easier to imagine if he weren't so complicit with the Dhimmicrats in so many things.

--------------

And thanks, that's why I chose it. But though he stopped the Mohammedans at Tours in 732 and drove them from France (a feat worth repeating!), he was not the first great hero in that cause. That honor probably belongs to Pelagius of Asturias (Pelayo, in Spanish), the Visigoth nobleman who saved his land (of which he was subsequently elected king) from the invader at Covadonga in 718 and launched the nearly 800-year-long reconquest of Spain. If there is an earlier such hero, I haven't found him yet.

McCain
This morning one of the guys on Laura Ingraham's show asked, "Whatever happened to the McCain-Santorum bill, or the McCain-Gingrich, or McCain-Sessions bill?" McC never seems enthused about promoting a law with a "fellow" conservative.
Reaching across the aisle sounds nice, as does "Americans want bi-partisan action," but it only means McC and a lefty team up.

His VP will be in line for Pres. in 2012 (talk about optimism!) If it's Huck, that gives the memdia 4 years to eviscerate him (see Cheney). Ah, but if it's Lieberman ...

No wonder they all hate Romney: When you're smart, successful, forward-looking and have lived the American Dream, Lord help you if you're rich because of it! That is the unforgivable sin! If you don't need the "special interests to supply you with $$, why you might actually be able to CHANGE WASHINGTON.

Wally, again wake up!
John McCain, already won, so let,s tell John to change and get on the right issues. I wanted Huckabee to win, I see now that John will win.
Pray that God will put the right person in the White House. I will be honest with you, I do not trust Mitt Romney, that is only a gut feeling.
Thanks! for your response.

Bro. Nick

McCain or Obama?
If the choice is McCain or Hillary I may have to do as McCain’s mother has suggested and “hold my nose and vote for her son”! But if the choice is McCain or Obama I may go Democratic this time around, for the first time in almost forty years. Reason being, I think by November the Iraq war may have become a non-issue if it continues on its present trend; Afghanistan or Pakistan will likely be more problematic. So despite all the left wing harping about pulling out of Iraq a potential early withdrawal may no longer be justified in the minds of the electorate.

So the question of who to vote for may become more a choice of who has the most talent for the job long term, rather than what they will accomplish in their first days in office. Since McCain is really a Democrat in most senses of the term, other than Iraq policy the decision will likely be a choice between two Democrat Administrations. As it stands today I believe I would rather support Obama than McCain, so unless Hilary runs John McCain is not likely to get my vote!

Constituent
Voting for Fred might give him delegates unless your state is "winner take all". And too many still to vote are: New York, Missouri, Arizona, New Jersey, Utah, Connecticut, Montana, Delaware, Virginia, and Vermont, which when added to Florida (the only "winner take all" primary so far) makes a total of 510 delegates, representing two of every nine delegates at the convention and nearly half of the 1,191 needed to win.

(My source for the states and the numbers is http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/rep ublican_delegate_count.html.)

It would be splendid if no candidate received a majority, and the convention were to be thrown open to draft a truly conservative dark horse, but that is not how it's going to happen. If there is no majority, then one will offer another the vice-presidency, the other will accept, and the true conservatives left outside will walk away, hopefully to form a new party, like the Republicans did the Whigs a century and a half ago and for just as good a reason.

that's what I get for punctuation
OK, the link I included *almost* works: the gremlins (nasty creatures and an ugly car) here at TH included my closing punctuation in the link, so when it doesn't work, just delete the ".)" at the end, and it'll work just fine. Sorry about that.

Or just hit this:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/repu blican_delegate_count.html


Good News!
Seems that Texas Governor Rick Perry has endorsed John McCain. We can now look forward to McCain's campaign imploding. (Perry, a very handsome man with fabulous hair, had previously endorsed Rudy Giuliani.)

There is hope. It's not from Hope, nor does it constantly harp on "hope", but it's hope nonetheless.

Senator McCain
McCain is a fighter, true enough.

The problem is he is constantly picking fights with the GOP! He seems to have gotten Reagan's 11th Commandment backwards ....

speaking of Texas...
Here's an idea that will never be adopted by the Republican National Committee. How about holding the first primaries/caucuses in states that have not been carried by Democrats in any presidential election since 1980? Front-load the states you carried: it almost makes too much sense.

Kerry took New Hampshire in 2004. Gore carried Iowa in 2000. Both went for Clinton in 1996. Histories like these should have bumped them to the back of the list.

South Carolina would get to stay up front, but Florida (Clinton in '96) wouldn't. Bump New Hampshire; insert Indiana. Wyoming stays; Nevada doesn't. And so on.

But no, the Republican establishment is too clever by half to compel their candidates to run to the right for the nomination. No, better to triangulate oneself out of a job than to do that.

speaking of primaries
Why should anyone NOT a Republican get to vote in the GOP primary? This independents and Democrats picking our nominee is for the birds.

Bro.nick Wake UP!
"I do not trust Mitt Romney, that is only a gut feeling."

Don't you think its high time you started thinking with your HEAD instead of "gut-feelings"?

The people who know Mitt well swear by his integrity.

McCain, Mr National Defense
WHAT A JOKE!
I heard him muttering this sad claim again today, but I'm sorry, Mr McCain, you cared nothing about DEFENDING the borders of the USA, and I think that pretty much denies you any claim to be strong on national defense in the war on terror!
You have been quite content, with your open borders allies, to leave us open to infiltration by any terrorists who wanted to enter our land to do damage, and to me that is a POOR national defense record.
Best in this war you defend the homeland FIRST, and then proceed to prosecute the war overseas.
This is yet another reason no one I know will ever vote for you, sir.
Oh, and it's not your "surge" in Iraq or Bush's (although he has some claim as he in the role of Commander in Chief gave the "go ahead"), it's Gen Petraeus' "surge" and a part of his overall counter-insurgency strategy.

Gut feeling
Wally, I did one time thought with my head about Mitt, but when he went after Mike Huckabee in Iowa
might gut started rumble, and that is when the feeling came.

I am sorry for my feelings, but I am really putting my mind on John McCain, so far my gut is okay.

by Bro. nick

Maybe write-ins will win in 2008!
With the mockery made by the current crop of candidates, many of us will have two choices:
(1) forego voting entirely (bad idea, it's what the liberals and commies want--and even more, a triumph for the anti-vote blokes such as Islamists and Red Chinese)
(2) Write-in the votes (right choice)

Please read this CBS report
A Question Of Care: Military Malpractice?
One Marine Served His Country With Care. Was His Cancer Misdiagnosed, Leading To His Death?
Comments 96
ELLENVILLE, N.Y., Jan. 31, 2007

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1 | 2Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez III was a father, a soldier, an artist and an actor. He loved life and the Marines. But skin cancer took his life. Was it military malpractice? (CBS)
Stories
Is The Military Neglecting PTSD Troops?
Soldier Suicide Attempts Skyrocket
(CBS) Carmelo Rodriguez was dancing with his niece just last year. By all accounts Rodriguez, a 29-year old, loved life, his family and the Marine Corps. He was also an artist, a father, and a part-time actor. He once appeared with Katie Holmes in a scene on the TV series Dawson's Creek.

CBS News correspondent Byron Pitts met Rodriguez two months ago. That once-buff physique had been whittled down to less than 80 pounds in 18 months by stage 4 melanoma. He was surrounded by family, including his 7-year-old son holding his hand. It was Rodriguez's idea we meet.

When Sgt. Rodriguez was in Iraq, military doctors, he says, misdiagnosed his skin cancer. They called it "a wart."

Eight minutes after Pitts met Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez, and CBS News was preparing to interview him, he died.

Concern Voter

Kinda sorta... close
"However, if Hillary Clinton is the nominee she will indeed energize and motivate the Republican base. There are literally millions of conservatives who will not vote unless they perceive a candidate who welcomes them in the Republican Party and takes up their cause."

This time around, conservatives who used to sit out will vote Democrat or third party if McCain is the nominee. Trying to shore up the ticket by picking a conservative sellout for VP will only make things worse. Bet on it. This is a transformational election. If we don't pass through this portal correctly, we can kiss off the GOP. We conservatives are FED UP with the GOP.

CBS report
Come on voters read this report!

P.Phil: too late?
We have already failed to pass through the portal correctly, the moment that everyone else's parochial concerns trumped coalition unity. We could have had a candidate who appealed to ALL conservatives, but no, each 1/3 thought it was the whole and that the other 2/3 would pliantly fall in behind them.

If it's McCain vs any Dhimmicrat, we know that the following things will be true.

* Our borders will remain open, and there will be a general amnesty for all illegals, present and future.

* Muslim terrorists and their bottom-feeding lawyers will be coming soon to a federal prison near you -- that is, until they make bail.

* Economic decisions affecting your family and future will be made by people who think the sky is falling -- or at least by people whose jobs will be made considerably easier if *you* think the sky is falling.

* Newly appointed judges won't be interested in hearing nor required to listen to your complaints; and God help you if you publish anything politically derogatory at the wrong time of year, because the ACLU certainly won't.

I'd love to think that a third party, a National Conservative Party, could rise up in time and prevent the disaster, but I fear that its function would be only to pick up the pieces four years hence.

Need to get beyond Reagan
The Republican Party needs to move beyond Reagan. His presidency was successful mainly due to his cult of personality. While he was a conservative, that did not prevent him from doing deals with the Democrats if it furthered the needs of the United States of America. Today's Republican's seem to have forgotten Reagan's ability to get along when it was needed. The current Republican candidates seem to have only picked up on the worst traits of Reagan and not the strength's that made him unique. In 1964 I heard Reagan give a speech in San Bernardino for Barry Goldwater, and the audience that night realized as I did that Reagan was a special person, far more persuasive than the candidate he was representing. Neither McCain nor Romney have the cult of personality that Reagan had and that is the product of the Republican Party selection process which is geared to picking a person based on a checklist rather than picking a real leader. The Republican Party also need a person who can unify the country and not divide it and trying to rule by capturing 50.1% of America then pretending you have a mandate. This will be a historic presidential campaign on way or the other. We either move firmly into the 21st century or try to redo the 20th century. I know which way Ronald Reagan would want to go.

Bobzmcishl - take a second look pt1
"Today's Republican's seem to have forgotten Reagan's ability to get along when it was needed."

Take another look. The Republicans have been trying to "get along" with the Democrats, all too well, I think. Of course, the Democrats have not been trying to "get along" with the Republicans. President Bush came to Washington and tried to work with the Democrats as he had done successfully in Texas. He gave the Democrats much of what they wanted. They fought him at every turn. Of course, "b-partisan" to Congress seems to mean, "do what the Democrats want." I think the Republican should have gotten wise to this game and fought the good fight for what we want, oh 6 or 7 years ago. Instead, McCain and his cronies bailed with "the Gang of 14" and other such gutless nonsense. I am constantly amazed that anyone could have watched the Congress during the Bush administration and blame the _Republicans_ for not getting along. Is that in some alternate universe? It sure didn't happen here. The Republicans should have, and should, stand up and fight for what we believe. They're going to get name-called anyway, so they might as well fight to win.

An observer might also notice that inspite of Democratic statements prior to the 2006 election, they have not changed the tone and worked with the Republican minority. They have taken the corruption they complained about and have been much worse! On earmarks their solution has been to hide them from observation. Amazing how the press notices - or not - depending upon which party is in charge.

Bobzmcishl - take a second look pt2
Reagan was not, repeat: -was not- successful because of any "cult of personality." Reagan was successful first because of the ideas he brought to the body politic. Secondly because he worked for years traveling this country, meeting people, listening to people, making speeches, supporting other Republicans, and generally doing the work to become a great leader so that when he was elected, he could lead. He had studies and learned. He was prepared. He laid the ground-work with years of preparation. The GOP, heck people in general, around the country knew him. He spoke with them, listened to them, and he worked for them. He was also a break from the failed Nixon and Ford Presidencies. Note though that he had his 11th Commandment: Thou shalt not put down other Republicans. He lost the primary to Ford in 1976 and then went around the country trying to get Ford elected. He really did care about what he was about, not merely faked it. All this matters.

Compare this to the current crop who want to "assume his mantle" without doing the work. That's the real picture. Public speaking can be learned.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.