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
Monday, February 11, 2008
Paul Greenberg :: Townhall.com Columnist
Character Counts: Of John McCain and his Critics
by Paul Greenberg
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Tuesday's election returns continue to reverberate: Mitt is now moot, Mike Huckabee is running stronger than ever (for vice-president), and John McCain, now the GOP's presidential nominee-in-waiting, is in trouble. But only with capital-C, talk show Conservatives.

Just go down the list: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, even El Rushbo himself . . . all sound dismayed, irritated and generally hacked off at Senator McCain's commanding performance on Super Tuesday, which must have seemed like Black Tuesday to the dittoheads of the world.

The Rev. Dr. James Dobson, who long ago was anointed pope of the Religious Right by all-knowing talk radio, has washed his hands of this upstart senator, this loose cannon on the good ship Ideological Conformity, who refuses to meekly recite the Reverend Doctor's political rosary.

That's the trouble with John McCain; he's always been his own man. He just will not go along with the party line, anybody's party line. He's always given his interrogators a hard time, refusing to break no matter what blandishments, punishments or calumnies are applied.

Sure, the man may get things done - like finding a way to get conservative judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate. He may even prefer fixing a system that's broken - like our immigration "system" - rather than just griping about it. And if he's proving right about the war in Iraq or on terror in general, well, that scarcely makes up for his unmitigated independence.

Consider the case of Ann Coulter, certified banshee of the American right. (The uncharitable might say certifiable on the basis of her more operatic performances.) The woman doesn't invite conversation so much as diagnosis. With her unfailing instinct for the outrageous, Ms. Coulter is always topping herself, and maybe has to, in order to keep our attention. Which she certainly does. You just have to watch - the way you find yourself slowing down to stare at a car wreck despite your best instincts.

Watching the Coulter Show, I keep thinking of one of those oh-so-mod Shakespearean dramas staged in contemporary costume and placed in the most jarring of settings - say, the executive suite of a modern Romneyesque corporation - in which Lady Macbeth appears as a bottle blonde in correct business attire text-messaging her latest order to Macbeth, Inc. When the curtain comes up, the sight may be a little jarring, but you keep watching - just to see what wretched excess comes next.

Ms. Coulter doesn't even have to raise her voice to be as grating as Chris Matthews, the only political commentator whose spiel rivals those HEAD-ON commercials for sheer volume. (Though his spiel may lack their intellectual content).

Except in Lady Coulter's case, you may not automatically punch the mute button at the sound of her exasperating voice. You've just got to hear what she'll say next. The other day, she conferred her endorsement on Hillary - yes Hillary! in preference to that maverick, that heretic, That Man.

Such has been John McCain's exile to outer darkness by those who hold in their hands, or at least have on their telescreens, the standard list of his deviations from the accepted canons of Rightthink and are checking it twice, thrice and on every re-run.

There's no getting around it: John McCain is just not popular with Conservative Spokesmen. It's only conservatives he appeals to, to judge by the election returns Tuesday. Also independents. Even discerning Democrats. And just plain voters in general. The kind who look to character first, and may even stop looking right there.

All these inescapable voices from stage right bring to mind the kind of true believer who'd rather lose with some ideologically correct robot - assembled according to their exact specifications - than win with a living, breathing, uncontrollable human being. Someone like John McCain. Someone with a mind of his own, and, much more worrisome, a will of his own.

But can John McCain unify the GOP in November? Maybe yes, maybe no. But if Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic presidential nomination this year, she'll unite the GOP for him. No wonder so many Republicans are rooting for her in the primaries; she may be their party's best hope - and Barack Obama the GOP's greatest fear.

The attitude of today's Pavlovian Conservatives toward Senator McCain is reminiscent of the disdain that admirers of the late great Robert A. Taft, icon of American conservatism in his time, had for Dwight Eisenhower and his great failing: He was not only too popular (everybody liked Ike) but he was ideologically undependable, maybe even just plain un-ideological, hard as that is for a certain species of political junkie to imagine - about anyone.

Wait a minute, comes the cry from the uniform ranks of Conservative Spokespersons: John McCain is not popular with those voters who identify themselves as Conservative - whether of the moderately, very or wild-eyed variety. And they've got the Exit Polls, today's sacred scrolls, to prove it.

Yes, Virginia, there are still people in this world, or at least political commentators in this world, who have not yet seen through the polls despite their abysmal record in this election and lots of others going back to 1948, or even 1936. The kind of pollsters who splice and dice the American electorate by class, race, age, gender, tax bracket, ethnicity, years of schooling, color of hair and every other which way . . . and then announce how We the neatly categorized People are going to behave in the voting booth. With, of course, a margin of error of plus or minus 3 or 4 percent. (It's that numeroid at the end that gives their findings the perfect note of false authority.)

And when the voters don't confirm to the pollsters' predictions, it's obviously the voters who are mistaken. We've refused to follow orders. Just like John McCain. No wonder so many of us identify with him.

Here's the big problem - well, one of many big problems - with Conservative Spokesmen as opposed to mere conservatives: The anointed see the American voter as some kind of schematic drawing in a poli-sci textbook, a pie chart of instincts, preferences and predetermined choices - rather than that most unpredictable of species, human beings.

But as anybody who's had Biology 101, let alone Comparative Anatomy, might have observed: The actual, living specimen on the table never - never - is an exact replica of the oh-so-neat drawing in the book. It is so much more complicated, detailed, whole - alive.

There's something grotesque about the kind of analysts who think they can reduce real live human beings to just the sum of our parts. They miss the whole. Flannery O'Connor, whose very name brings a smile to memory, was once asked, as a representative Southern Author, another arbitrary category she despised, why Southern writers seem so fascinated by freaks. Because, she said, we in the South can still recognize a freak when we see one. And in order to do that, you have to have some idea of the whole man. And that's just what these oh-so-scientific pollsters, much like the Conservatives-by-the-numbers on the airwaves, seem to lack: an appreciation of the whole, independent, unpredictable, free American.

My louder and more rigid friends in the Great Mediarama out there are victims of the most basic of misperceptions about the nature of conservatism: They've confused right-winger with conservative, and Americans with some kind of herd they can round up, pen up, and speak for. They can no more do so than tell John McCain what to do. No wonder so many of us rather admire the man.

But these professional Conservatives are so provoked with John McCain for disagreeing with them on some issues - I'm not wild about some of his stands, either - that they'd be willing, in effect, to help elect a president from the other party with whom they disagree on almost everything.

Goodness. I like to think of myself as a conservative, too, but I try not to be a damfool.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
"much more worrisome, a will of his own"
There are a lot of sheep in this country who do just go along with a party line. But there are also voters who stick to their values instead of a party line.
It has nothing to do with the party. It's about voting for a candidate that you can be proud of.
You act like people hate McCain because he thinks for himself. But that's not it at all. I disapprove of McCain because he's just like the rest of them. A McCain presidency will just give us more of the same. And more government. Yuck. I wouldn't even waste my time voting if I could only choose between him and Obama. Thank goodness I can vote for a third party...

Well sorry
to say. You are a damfool. You blame media conservatives and you think we admire McCain. I have often admired your writing. This I have to say is not one of your best. I think you should do some rechecking. I can't stand McCain and I am not in the media. Just fly over country.

Paul Greenberg - a shrill shill
Way to show what you neocons are made of. Go ahead rail, rail against the dying of the light!

It's truly laughable to have this kind of commentary taking place on what is supposed to be a conservative forum. McCain is his own man?
Yes, except for the substantial pieces owned by the big banking houses like Morgan Chase, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Goldeman Sachs, well the list goes on and on. Check it out:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00006424& cycle=2008

But, don't worry, I'm sure he isn't beholden to the big money interests that finance him and have a vested interest in the profits generated by continual war.

BTW, these are the same entities that own & fund Hillary and Obama.

The way you can tell conservatives is that they have principles that don't shift with political winds.

No conservative will ever vote for McCain.

thebigmick
I'm not so sure about you amnesty thesis.

I would say, at least in Washington State, the party leaders were disgruntled and opposed to Mike Huckabee and rather risk him sweeping last Saturday they called it and pronounced a winner.

As for McCain, it is possible the party leaders are pushing him on us, but not as a amnesty issue but a misguided electability issue.

Think like a politician for a moment.......

Pol 1: OK, we have McCain and Huckabee left, now what?
Pol 2: Yeah and we don't like McCain because he doesn't always tow the party line.
Pol 3: But Huckabee's religious history is scary, he might actually try to follow the principals he speaks of and then we would loose power because he really wants to give it back to the people.
Pol 2: We need the religious leg of the party in November, but we must not let them have much if any say in who the candidate is.
Pol 1: What if we support McCain and replace the religious leg with independents? Maybe McCain's liberal leanings can take independents away from the democrats.
Pol 3: If it works we keep our power. If it fails maybe 4 years of democrat rule will scare people back into voting republican.
Pol 2: We'd be taking a huge risk, but I see no other choice.
Pol 1: If it works McCain is more controllable. We know his weaknesses and how to play them. Huckabee would make us live up to our promises and loose power, or face individual public humiliation if we oppose him. That could cause our voters to stop electing us.

How is that for a thesis?

don't cut off nose to spite your face
Agree with WSG's prescription:

"I will vote for the horse's rearend in November but will do everything in my power to see that we send CONSERVATIVES to Congress to get things done
....The party elite is in for a trip to the woodshed. The voters(base) runs the party NOT Crist, Arnold, and a cadre of "moderates" who need the affirmation of the media and their drinking buds in DC. in the Demorat party.
Talk radio has changed the dynamic of US politics. It is NOT the pundits whom you need to be afraid of - It is an enraged electorate that is talked down to and then told to "calm down" and 'oh by the way pay all the taxes so we can continue to party...... without you.'
Those days are over Paul !"

Hear hear! Conservatives were galvanized, made their wishes known and stopped the shamnesty at least temporarily. The same thing needs to happen as far as making Republican candidates and policy conservative. The left has someone to vote for that they are excited about. They're not going to vote for a centrist bi-partisan Republican. The right has no one to vote for wholeheartedly. Make sows-ear Republicans into the best silk purses you can by pushing them toward conservative positions.

Character Counts
If character counts, Senator McCain has already lost. He is a liar, a back-stabber, and a snob. He does not have any real leadership experience. He is also a liberal; his voting record in the Senate proves it. He is a Democrat wearing a Republican label. Anybody with any conservative principles will find it impossible to vote for Senator McCain. As for me, I am still undecided whether not to vote for a Presidential candidate or to vote for a third party.

"Akagi writes:
"Well I'd argue that the Dobson's(sic)and Pat Robertson's(sic), etc aren't true conservatives either since they want to use the power of the state . . .to restrict freedom and there is nothing conservative about that! So they . . . must be liars too when they use the C-word.

Since conservative or liberal are matters of opinion, how is claiming to be one and you saying they aren't, lying? Do you not understand how to define the term? People here call me a liberal and I say I am not -- am I lying?"

If you're going to insist on defining the term, then it becomes removed from the realm of opinion. I define it as "not John McCain." Either way, I know it when I see it! And I used plain examples to demonstrate it. Just how do Dobson and Robertson propose to "use the power of the state . . .to restrict freedom"?


Same ole BS
The man tried to LEAVE the party! You want conservatives to ignore his record on numerous things they have supported for years. Question that, ask to be heard and your tossed overboard by the oh so wise Liberal Republican Establishment that gave us Bob Dole as a candidate not so long ago.

Keep attacking conservatives and your worst nightmare will come true. You are doing the dems job for them you idiots.

Nice Job
Well said Paul...Well said.

We have been betrayed
I'm a Conservative...and not a Conservative Spokesman...who does not listen to Conservative talk radio. I am also not an Evangelical and don't take any direction from James Dobson. I am 50 years old and have never voted for a Democrat in a national or statewide election. By embracing John McCain, the Republican party has left me. I vowed I would never vote for him when he prostituted himself with the Gang of 14, and I wills stick by my promise. I will either vote cast a write-in vote or will not vote at all. I will also not contribute a dime to the Republican party. Maybe you will eventually figure out how strongly we feel about betrayal.

Chris
More evidence of Abuse by the Establishment Party Machine Bosses.

Consider this
The MacChurian Candidate V Hillybama
Tale of the Tape

McSame--Old and tired
Hillybama--younger and young and energetic
M--old OLD school insider
HB--preaching change (bama nearly an OUTsider and definitely NEW School)--and this in an AGE of change.

M--grumpy and backward looking
HB-preaching hope and change

M--Nixon---HB--the Black JFK

M--Dole the Lesser verses Clinton the Woman
(hey if the play fails miserably the first time, just run it again, right!)

And just where does ANYONE think McSame has the reach on em?

The Establishment Party Machine Bosses have manipulated the Nomination of a LOSER, folks.

WHY do you think they did that?

the big mick

John McCain
Great column. You and Charles Krauthammer give me all my talking points. How can McCain lose with commentators like you write so clearly about this election. Ruth Valdez

Chris and RebelHawk
And so we can conclude that the Establishment Party Bosses WANT The McChurian Candidate and him ONLY. That we have been deftly left with NO CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE!---OR MORE EXACTLY--With NO ANTI-AMNESTY Candidate!!
Note too the INTENSE effort to MARGINALIZE the Radio Conservatives (Greengeld's "Captial C" crap). What role did THEY play in stopping Shamnesty? And who has been FORCED down our throats??

Looks to me that the inescapable conclusion is that the Conservative Free GOP Gilt Bird Cabin Establishment Party Bosses so FEARED the Anti-Amnesty/Seal the Border MOVEMENT that THEY MADE CERTAIN, we never got a CHANCE to vote that way.

Further, looking a McSame's weaknesses as a Candidate, it would appear they would actually rather LOSE the election then risk allowing us to vote for an Anti-Amnesty Candidate. Makes Beck's talk of MexAmericanada, more credible, doesn't it.

the big mick

wiseone writes:
The State Party chair in Washington halted the vote count and declared McCain the winner after counting only 83% of the votes and McCain leading by only 200 votes. Huckabee is protesting and may even sue.
****

And Huckabee should, if the state party doesn't do a voluntary re-count with 100% of the vote.

I don't care if you are Democrat or Republican, a front runner or at the back of the pack with 0.001%, in a primary or general election; all votes cast should be counted except those which can be proven to be fraudulent (IE; pets, dead people, etc).

Calling a race like that would have been like ending this years Super Bowl at 2 min till the end of the fourth quarter and selecting the Patriots as the winner because they had a points lead at the moment. Those who watched saw what happened in the last two minutes of the Super Bowl this year, and the same could have happened in Washington State.

still say all you need to know about The
MacChurian Candidate is that Roberto digs him.
That and that uber commiequeer Kerry tapped him for Veep. Conservatives for Kerry--what a concept! Though I am now a Charter Member of Conservatives for Hillybama.
My reasoning on this has been cogent and clear.
McSame is one more step down the road that has led us to the Brink of Socialism. His Socialism Lite is the more deadly poison that accustoms its victim, as we have be being accustomed for decades now. He kills more surely for being slightly more slowly.

Hillybama is Socialism Straight, at least with them there is the HOPE that America will Choke on it and puke it back up before the Fatal Dose is absorbed. NO such hope with The McChurian Candidate.

the big mick

RebelHawk writes:
It's hard to get around the fact that less than one third of the party has voted for McCain and yet he is touted as the party leader because of a number of liver states having a winner take all rule that sqewers the real wishes of the party as a whole.
****

I agree with the above quote. This is what we get with the minority rule concept of today.

You left out the 123 members of the Republican National Committee who get to act as "super delegates". They are not delegates selected based on a vote, but party members who get to use their own opinion in the decision of who their delegate count goes to. In essence they get two votes, once in their state caucus or primary and again at the convention.

If delegates were selected as you suggest the race would still be a fairly close 3 or more way race.

You made my point, didn't you?
"In LA (Lousiana) his vote went 55/45 Huckabee/McCain (according to the Zogby exits..."

In a one on one vote against Romney, Thompson OR HUCKABEE, McCain would have done poorly.

Character
McCain doesn't have the character I am looking for in a Republican leader.
I don't bank on pungits for advise - they are more entertainment than sounding boards.
What I do take stock in is voting records , speeches and professionalism.
The Republican Party seems to be giving McCain the nomination as a gift for past offenses - like giving Bush the nomination in 2000 and ignoring him .
Personally I have never held McCain in high regard and that isn't going to change just because the party tells me to.

McCain got only 40% not 51%
You're still a clueless insect.

For the cockroach's information
CA was not a one-on-one contest, Huckabee and Paul were also in it. You don't even know the meaning of one-on-one, do you?

GO BACK TO YOUR FLOOR DRAIN SCUMBAG!

Dave is CORRECT
wiseone is indeed the wise one.

wobbie is still a clueless cockroach.


Carlos
What planet are you living on?

Greenberg
YOU are the ramscalious dunderhead! How dare you call those who question McDisgusting's character and history of anti-American, anti-conservatism unthinking, idiot dittoheads?

The ONLY accurate thing in your dysfunctional missive are the first two words in the title - Character Counts.

Greenberg, GET A CLUE!!
The one thing that is clear from all of this is that McCain IS NOT the peoples choice. He is merely the default cantidate left over from the more popular cantidates splitting the vote of the majority.

In a one on one vote against Romney, Thompson or Huckabee, McCain would have done poorly.

If our primary system had been intentionally designed to give us the least popular cantidate of the lot, it could hardly have been more effective in doing so.

The party needs to mandate a system wherein the field is narrowed to two cantidates with a run off vote to choose one. It is THE ONLY REASONABLE WAY TO DO IT.

Rush and Ann...

What have they done? Collected up a liberal audience?

They use foul language like Air America. Put sexual reflections into their shows like the Hollywood liberals. Their personal lives are as deviant as the Clinton's.

These are not Conservatives! They are mocking us!

You would never have heard


Any griping from republicans in 2000 cause no one could hear anything but the waaaaaaaaaaaaa of the democrats

Just struct me as strange
Only the Republican Party is being divided by the candidates placed up for election.

Not that I didn't already believe the Republicans are the ones being worked over by hard manipulation. (democrats are already without principles and just need to hear the word "change" and need no more manipulation than that)

I said it once already, but it fits this thread.
The GOP is intentionally setting this up for surrender, one way or another, in my opinion.

habermassive
I read most all Jack Cashills articles.
A true journalist

Coulter
Ann Coulter had it right:

No more liberals.

For coachjohn
"The candidate has been selected by less than half of the states."

It's even worse than you think.

The candidate was selected in winner-take-all primaries in which the "winner" needed only a plurality, not even a majority. Poster Rebelhawk has pointed out at 6:18 PM that if delegates were awarded in proportion to the popular vote Romney and McCain would be tied.

Even worse, some states, such as Florida, have allowed non-Republicans to vote in their Republican Primary despite the fact that their RepuiblicanPrimary is supposed to closed, with only registered Republicans voting.

And it gets worse yet.

McCain has won a large share of his delegates by getting a large independent and Democrat crossover vote in blue states where the Republican candidate will have no chance of winning in Novemeber no matter who the nominees are. These states include California, New Hampshire, and New Jersey.

In short, the Republican nominee is being chosen largely by non-Republicans in states that will go for the Democrats in Novemeber and is being shoved down our throats in an effort to make it as easy for the Democrat to win in November as possible.

When Dick Nixon manipulated the process like this in 1972 they set about to impeach him.

As if there was ever any doubt that the Republican nominating process is being ripped from the voters, the Republican State Party Chairman of Washington halted the vote count there this weekend with 83% of the vote counted and declared McCain the winner despite the fact that his lead was only 200 votes over Huckabee.

Always been his own man...
except when he was Keating`s man.

McCain
Republicans, in trying to out-do the Democrats managed to promote the only Republican with negative ratings approaching Hillary's.

It could have been easy enough, let the Dems anoint Hillary and run a solid conservative against her, let her unprecedented negatives do her in.

Simple.

But no, the Reps. had to put up the most distrusted, disloyal, disliked candidate running. Effing idiots.

figure it out talent scout ...
you say the biggest mistake of the "conservative" punditocracy is to not support Hunter, Tancredo, Paul, or in the case of Airhead America; why aren't Nadir's (sic pun) principled calls answered ...

come on ... the answer is so obvious ...

why do we have these threads on Town Hall that talk as if the "system is actually legitimate" and there is something to be had by actually voting for one of the unprincipled oligarchs from column R or column D?

O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Randi Rhodes, and Ed Schultz all cannot and will never buck their RubyCon masters who pay their salaries ...

they will NEVER tout a non-globalist and principled candidate who won't expand the already outrageous foreign aid packages we give to Israel and who won't expand and extend the adventurist RubyCon foreign policy agenda on behalf of Israel ...

all you have to do is read Jack Cashill re. Obama's selection for foreign policy czar to know the fix is in: with McShame you'll get the 100 yrs. war Buchanan talks of; with Hillary you get the Senator from Jerusalem, NY (no candidate wins NYC or even NY without the ascent of the Koch/Bloomberg wing of the Democrat party) and finally with Obama you get the self-serving Richard Clark to echo the intentionally failed Clinton ME foreign policy ...: the hackneyed meme of the designated Palestinian union boss refusing the "generous Israeli offer of a peace settlement" (built on top of and in addition to all of Israel's other settlements no doubt)

crazy as it seems Obama is the lesser of all the evils at this point; he's enough of a cipher coming from Columbia University and the home of Edward Said instead of the Skull and Bones wing of Yale University that it's possible but not probable that he's not yet owned by the neoCon Illuminati. undoubtedly if elected he will be soon enough or else he'll go the way of Camelot.

Quit Criticizing Greenberg and McCain
Both Greenberg and McCain are smarter than you and they know what's best for America. If you don't agree with this statement, then you are all ignorant, bigoted, inbred damfools.

Did I sum up your argument accurately Mr Greenberg?

I didn't get to vote
McCain is already the candidate and I didn't get to vote. I would not have voted for him and there are at least 5 other candidates I would have voted for BEFORE him. The candidate has been selected by less than half of the states.
When I ask people who they are supporting and why, I get an answer like: he was a war hero, he wants change etc. No facts. When I speak to someone who is dismayed about McCain, I get answers that reflect knowledge about his record and what he stands for. So the people who know about McCain, know the issues and the ones voting about McCain don't. How can 88% of the population be against amnesty and we have now the author of the Amnesty act. The talk radio pundits are giving opinions based on facts. Some of us are agreeing. I hope someone starts a mass movement for a write in candidate such a Romney.

And I like Ann Coulter.


Romney's strategy
I think I know why Romney suspended his campaign.he knew if he continued to split the conservative vote with Huckabee in winner-take-all primaries McCain would continue to win states with pluralities, not majorities, built on liberal and moderate votes.

By suspending his campaign, but not dropping out, Romney retains the delegates he's already won while allowing Huckabee to win states McCain needs to get to 1,091 votes before the convention.

If Huckabee can win enough states he can prevent McCain from hijacking the nomination before the convention and there can be a brokered convention with Romney as the king maker.

This is a longshot to be sure, but it'a a better chance than continuing to split the conservative vote with Huckabee.

McCain's camp is aware of this possibility, especially after Huckabee kicked McCain's butt in this past weekend's primaries. That's why his minions are whining that Huckabee should get out of the race.

BTW - the State Party chair in Washington halted the vote count and declared McCain the winner after counting only 83% of the votes and McCain leading by only 200 votes. Huckabee is protesting and may even sue.

Parting shot
Mr. Greenberg writes:

"I like to think of myself as a conservative, too, but I try not to be a damfool."

You've got this backwards. You are a fool. And you are not a conservative.

Akagi is wrong again
"You got all your SCOTUS nominees on the court and all but two of your appeals court nominees."

SIX nominees were denied up-or-down votes, not two.

As a result of the Gang of Fourteen we got three Appellate Judges confirmed that were being filibustered; Browm, Owen, and Pryor. On the other side, two nominees were specifically excluded by the Gang of Fourteen; William Myers and Henry Saad.

Four other judicial nominees never got an up-or-down vote because the Democrat minority in the Senate abused the filibuster privilege to stall their nominations until after the 2006 elections and the new Senate, with Dems in the majority, was seated in January of 2007.

The deal made by the GOF expired when the new Senate was seated in 2007.

Neither Roberts nor Alito were part of the original deal made by the GOF. In spite of this the GOF convened a separate discussion on Alito in which they acted like they were doing us all a favor to honor the spirit of their original agreement and not oppose cloture on his nomination.

The Cloture vote on Alito was 72-24 in Alito's favor. Even a unanimous "nay" from the GOF, would have left opponents of Alito three votes short of the 41 needed for a successful filibuster.

In the case of Henry Saad, the nomination was blocked by one Senator, Carl Levin of MI. Levin had his nose out of joint because Helene White, his cousin's wife, had her nomination blocked by the Republicans during the '90's. This petty vengeance is what the GOF honored as an "extraordinary circumstance". The fact that the Republicans who blocked White were the MAJORITY is insignificant to the Democrats and Levin.

Every nominee deserves an up-or-down vote. "[E]xtraordinary circumstances" are what the Judiciary Committee is for. Six blocked appointments is six too many.

DeLay Rips McCain

DeLay Rips McCain for Opposing Medicare Drug Plan

Is Delay out of his mind? How is this pork filled bill with no money to pay for it conservative?

CNS-Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay criticized likely Republican presidential nominee John McCain - and by extension some of the more conservative members of Congress - by calling McCain’s 2003 vote against the Medicare prescription drug plan a non-conservative vote.

DeLay made his remarks in an interview with Cybercast News Service at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C., on Saturday.

While in Congress, DeLay had helped quashed a rebellion by House conservatives, who tried to defeat the prescription plan then being promoted by President Bush.

READ MORE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/delay-rips-mccain- for-opposing-medicare-drug-plan

RebelHawk is right.
Not only are we following through with what we said many, many years ago, promising we would never support a McCain nomination, but adding insult to injury the corrupt primaries left us without a voice.

Some of us had NO SAY in the selection of the nominee. Obviously the GOP set up the primaries in such a way that certain groups of voices were not considered or welcomed. They make us mute in the primary election but demand we vote for 'their' choice in the general election.

Primary election reform should be a priority. Both Dem and GOP vote the same day for their choice and within a timeframe for every state in close proximity. No more 3 states voting in Dec, 4 in Jan, 26 in Feb, etc. Those of us who can't vote until March and in my case the end of April are left without a choice or voice. Both being closed 'party members only' and both dividing delegates by popular vote.

Regardless, if write ins are allowed in my district, I will write in Romney.

Akagi - wrong again
"As for immigration, there are between 14-20 million illegals in the US today--the US deports only around 62,000 per year. It would take hundreds of years to deport the current numbers even if not a single illegal alien ever entered the US again. Deporting any significant amount of them is unrealistic and will NEVER happen."

You purposefully assume that the rate of deportation cannot and will not be increased.

Elect me President and it will get done. Within a year.

All you have to do is remove people illegally in the country from the protection of law. That's it. Anyone who commits a crime against an illegal invader gets an automatic amnesty or pardon (the pardon is guaranteed, since the President can give out pardons at will.)

Note that hiring or harboring an illegal is not a crime against an illegal, and would therefore still be prosecuted; preferably something involving tar, feathers and a rail headed for the border.

Conservative
jenifa writes:

"McCain lies when he claims to be the true conservative.."

Well I'd argue that the Dobson's and Pat Robertson's, etc aren't true conservatives either since they want to use the power of the state--illegitimately in my view--to restrict freedom and there is nothing conservative about that! So they and their supporters must be liars too when they use the C-word.

Since conservative or liberal are matters of opinion, how is claiming to be one and you saying they aren't, lying? Do you not understand how to define the term?

People here call me a liberal and I say I am not--am I lying?

The Rank And File Are Upset Too!!!
The Republican Party has not choosen McCain as his standard bearer. Only about 29% of them have.

Before Mitt Romney dropped out the delegate count looked like this:
McCain 710
Romney 282
Huckabee 195
Paul 14
And a smattering of others.

But what if delegates had been choosen on the basis of the percentage of people who voted for the various candidates. It would have looked like this just before Mitt dropped out:
Romney 427
McCain 427
Huckabee 234
Paul 78
and a smattering of others.

The second delegate count is more accurately reflective of what each candidate would have gotten if they would have proportioned them according to the amount of the popular vote they got.

It's hard to get around the fact that less than one third of the party has voted for McCain and yet he is touted as the party leader because of a number of liver states having a winner take all rule that sqewers the real wishes of the party as a whole.

It isn't just the conservative talking heads that are upset. Many of the main stream members are upset too. They know their party has been hijacked and they are not happy about it.

And they are not toing to take it lying down, or maybe that is exactly what they will do come election day. They will lay around their houses and not vote.

Maybe it's time for the party to reform and truly allow the wishes of the rank and file to be relfected in the convention delecate count, or else the party will continue to suffer the consequences.

He lies when he says he's conservative
McCain lies when he claims to be the true conservative, because
He didn't just reach across the aisle, but JUMPed across the aisle to vote with Teddy, Feingold, etc.
He says he doesn't believe in amnesty, but proposes just that.
He says Sam Alito is "too conservative".
He opposes water-boarding.
Not just when he lies about Mitt.

Immigration
Sooo.... what rock were you living under when McCain-Kennedy was shot down in flames by the 'not needed' American people?


They didn't get 60 votes did they? And they had the 218 in the House. I expect the Democrats to gain more seats this year and if Obama or Clinton is president, expect a bill much worst to follow...and this time it will pass.


No you are not a
damfool but you sure are a damn fool ! You denigrate those you do not agree with but you do not discuss the liberal points that scares the hell out of the people that do not like him.

Akagi
"They don't need the American people, they need 60 Senators and 218 members of the house or so."

Sooo.... what rock were you living under when McCain-Kennedy was shot down in flames by the 'not needed' American people?




Character counts?
After that blather of an article I would suggest you examine your own "character", and change your name to Spinberg.

Where McCain is concerned here, he IS a character, not to be confused with having character.

Thomas Sowell expressed it best:
QUOTE
February 1, 2008
Let's talk sense. Benedict Arnold was a war hero but that did not exempt him from condemnation for his later betrayal.
Being a war hero is not a lifetime get-out-of-jail-free card. And becoming President of the United States is not a matter of rewarding an individual for past services.
The Presidency is a heavy responsibility for the future of the nation, including generations yet unborn. Character and integrity are major qualifications.
The passing years and a friendly media have allowed Senator McCain's shortcomings in the character and integrity department to fade into the background.
McCain was one of "the Keating five" -- Senators who used their influence to try to protect a failing savings & loan company, which also became the subject of a corruption investigation.
During the 2000 primaries, the Associated Press reported Senator McCain's joking about people with Alzheimer's.
This went beyond bad taste because (1) it was known at the time that Ronald Reagan was suffering from Alzheimer's and (2) the media to whom McCain was pandering hated Ronald Reagan.
It is especially ironic now to see McCain wrapping himself in the mantle of President Reagan.
With the momentum of his Florida primary win behind him, going into the "Super Tuesday"
UNQUOTE

It's not about Conservative radio talk show hosts. It's about a self centered, self interested cross the ethical line, John McCain.

No Mandate for Mac II
McCAin is the candidate of those who want to torpedo conservatism, & are no friends of the GOP either. I still think much of the support that got him nominated will vote for the Demmie in November.

If conservatives "hold their noses" & get McCain elected, he will not only continue the ill policies he pushed before, but he'll have our mandate. He will claim conservatives support open borders, energy rationing, activist judges, hi taxes, et al. Even a Republican Congress would compliantly go along with such an agenda. Bad as Hillary or Obama are, they won't have our mandate, & Congress might oppose the more radical notions as it did Mr. Clinton.

Let the crossovers & "moderates" elect him, since they nominated him. I'm voting indie.

No Mandate for Mac
"...these professional Conservatives are so provoked with John McCain for disagreeing with them on some issues...that they'd be willing, in effect, to help elect a president from the other party with whom they disagree on almost everything."

Why is it real conservatives are not allowed to have expectations & standards? Why are they always called upon to "compromise?" Is there no criterion? Is there no sticking point?

Exactly what common ground do you find with him on the supression of political speech i.e. "McCain-Feingold?" Real conservatives hold freedom of speech, press, asembly, & to petition as near sacred. furthermore, free speech help fuel the conservative victories of the '80's & '90's. McCain isn't simply in disagreement; he put this issue on the table for the 1st time in 2 centuries.

Exactly how can you compromise on the open borders/illegal alien problem & remain conservative? How does anyone so soft on border security have any cred as an "antiterrorism" POTUS?

Given the impact judicial activism has had, & potentially will have, how is it you can tolerate his obstructionism when we had a rare opportunity to place a number of good judges on the courts.

How can you claim to be conservative & tolerate a candidate who seems to live on the "climate change" reservation drinking its Kool-Aid?

Tell me--
Since I firmly believe that we have been and will continue to be "sold out" by the sleazy politicians in DC, I don't think it will make much difference who gets elected. (hope I am wrong). So tell me, if any one or group that believes in the manure that either party is putting out about all this amnesty etc. will send us a money order to pay for our medical expenses , food, education, all health care, rent subsidies, etc. let me know.
I still believe that unless proven wrong, that the illegals will continue to receive these benefits no matter who gets elected and the jobs will continue to be exported, and our two excellent border guards will still be unjustly in prison for doing their jobs.. I will write in Hunter and Tancredo always. I think that this PG article was weak at best.

McPain
It is becoming increasingly apparent that there is about to be a time to choose. There will be a line in the sand, and real Republicans will stand on the right of it. RINOs like Greenburg will stand on the left of it, and we will have a sorting between men and boys. This is good. We have had these wannabe Democrats in our party too long.

Mr. Greenberg,
Do the words "future credability" mean anything to you?

Mr. Greenberg
Takes a good thrashing to separate the wheat from the chaff. In this case it seems we are separating true conservatives from Republican hacks. Kind of getting an idea where you fall?

Try harder not to be a damfool, Paul
Oh geez here it is: ANOTHER snarky snippy you-have-no-other-choice-so-toe-the-line screed.

Why is it that this nebulous alleged crowd of "moderates" are entitled to be catered to, & radical leftist socialist Demmies get to be "worked with" but the true base of the party is blown off during the session, & then told to suck it up or go pound sand come the election? Why is no one derided or marginalized for sticking by principles & philosophies EXCEPT conservatives, who are constantly hectored for being "ideological" instead of "pragmnatic"? Why is leftist Democratic ideology & worldview always to be stipulated & accepted by GOP'ers? Why for that matter are "moderates" presumed to want pretty much the same things as the hardcore Demmies?

Yet, if that's so, why does everyone in the GOP, & even a few Demmies, claim to be in some sense or other "conservative?" Why do they want the "C" word, but not the "L" word, used to refer to them?

Words mean things. There has been a constant campaign to redefine or qualify "conservative" to mean support for Big Sugar Daddy Pork Barrel Welfare State, but big government conservative is an oxymoron. Whatever government has & spends, has been taken from you, whatever space it occupies is offlimits to you, whatever it does & decides denies your freedom to do & decide.

McCain's "maverick" cred is artificial & bogus. McCain is in fact a conformist & toes a party line. Specifically, he toes the establishment big-gvmt & pop media elitist line. Thus he embodies their scheme to marginalize & effectively disenfranchize & silence conservatives & conservatism. Conservatism threatens the career government class & the media & other elitists that orbit around it. That's the REAL reason they support him.

Why Surprised?
Why are Repubs so surprised by the reaction to McCain's nomination? Conservatives have said right along that we wouldn't vote for liberal McCain. Did they think we were kidding?

Greg B, SD writes:
McCain didn't give a damn what we thought back then - he still voted for amnesty - and he won't give a damn what you think in the future, especially when he has more of his liberal dem buddies in Congress helping him.
****

True that he didn't care.

But if he is out of Congress we are down one supporter of that bill, and with others who are now opting to quit or make this their last term in office to become lobbyists we the voters have a chance to pack Congress with REAL conservatives who would never let another amnesty bill get anywhere near a President McCain's desk.

If he never gets a bill the only way he can pass such law into effect is executive order and I'm not sure that would settle well with either side.

As he campaigns in the general he will have to take more conservative stances to bring in conservative votes. He will have to attack the Democrat candidate on their liberal agendas and spending (as he hinted at in his CPAC speech). Those things will sever some of the liberal support he has. And like the liberals have attacked Bush on the war they will do the same with him, so if he does anything in the form of an executive order even a liberal controlled congress would be quick to vote to overturn such an act even if they agree with the concept simply because of their war position and that they can't be seen by their constituents allowing someone from the other side to dictate policy.

This election cycle and the next mid-term are important in more ways than who holds the White House. If we gain conservative control in the White House and 1/2 if not all of congress we can keep a McCain Presidency in line till a better conservative comes along.

Jackie
McCains entire record has been very liberal. I'm just one more veteran NOT SUPPORTING McCain.

We have been listening to all sorts of nasty names because we are doing what we said we would do 7 years ago...not support Mccain. Your camp views us as fools, we view yours as foolish. McCain has shown constant contempt for the GOP. Name an instance, short of the WOT, where McCain has not been in league with liberal Dems? Even more so than Hillary. In fact, he initiated the liberal charge. Not all of us will vote for Hillary. Some will sit home, others will vote conservative by write-ins and senate/house votes. We can't go along with endorsing a liberal who will only continue to go left.

Please advise
I am one who believes Senator McCain to be a back-stabbing media suckup who would call the Swift Vets liars without knowing anything whatsoever about them; who would accuse our troops of torturing prisoners to garner praise from Democrats in office and in the media even though he aided our enemies in the process; who is so ignorant of how a market economy works that he said he wishes interest rates were zero; who believes "profit" to be a dirty word and who demonizes drug companies for the same reason he called Swift Vets liars and accused our troops of torture: to glorify himself with professional Democrats in the press.

I would like to know two things: please provide the list of personal insults that Mr. Greenberg would apply to me, and tell me why a Republican voter should not take this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to return a favor by figuratively stabbing Senator McCain in the back.

oh, Jackie
Thanks for your support on my service. But, to be honest, it was just too damn much fun to get credit for serving.

Jackie
Sounds thought out.
However, I don't buy into the Dems being afraid of McLame.
In my view, the crossover votes were to keep him in, and cause difficulties in the party. (a win so far)
They aren't going to vote for him, and know a very large portion of the base might not either. Further, if the base isn't voting for Pres...they may sit the entire election out and give them bigger majorities in congress. (big win if it happens)
The young Dem voters are impressed with the opportunity to vote for a "first". The 18 year olds I have in my classes don't even know who Carter is/was. They don't know Reagan, they weren't cognizant of the first gulf war or Somalia. They don't know about Bosnia. They barely remember Clinton because of the MSM and family members.
In fact, I doubt that McLame would win even if the base showed up in force (by force? - haha) and voted 100% for him. The former crossovers are crossing back in Nov.

USMc Ret
First, thank you for your service. Sorry, I agree with Kemp et al - The dems are terrified by McCain - 1/2 of them hate Hil, 1/2 remember the disaster of inexperienced Carter (and Obama is even more wet behind the ears) Visualize this:"We can meet and talk with the Jihadists, maybe hold hands around the campfire, sing - they will be our friends." LOLOL Nope, don't want 2-3 super libs on SC, don't want national health care, and will not sit it out. Just too damned important. I will judge McCain on his entire record not selective items. I will Vote Republican because I am most aligned with this party. I have voted Republican for 45 years and will so every time

for orlandocajun
orlandocajun writes: "You see Paul, conservatives are against McCain because he's been his own man. Sooooooooooo, please give us a reason why we should support him"

I'll give you a reason.
To return the favor for all those whom YOU screwed over, all these years.

Consider this:

I'm an endangered species these days--a pro-choice conservative. Like Rudy Giuliani.

On abortion, the GOP used to have a strong wing of pro-choice moderates. The GOP platform was pro-choice through 1972. You pro-life "pure conservatives" forced them out of the conservative movement, and forced us out of the GOP, without a second thought. What you said at the time was that those of us who were pro-choice, or who didn't back Bush's stand on embryonic stem cell research or gay rights, should suck it up and vote Republican anyway. Because you said the economy and national defense were more important.

Now the shoe is on the other foot. And guess what, instead of sucking it up, you're walking out!

Apparently your "solution" all these years was for the moderates to suck it up and for you "pure conservatives" to run the whole show.

Well, that's too damn bad.

Jackie
get the current % rankings, not the "entire time in congress" firgures.
THe last rated year he got, McLame sat at 56%.
I think even Hitlery was close to that.

As opposed to those pundents who are sweating their hanging their wagon on a falling star, I won't tell you how to vote. But I will tell you that I won't be joining you to put this pretender in office.

Akagi writes:
Monday, February, 11, 2008 11:49 AM
"...Every nominee deserved an up-or-down vote. The "extraordinary circumstances" are what the Judicial Committee is for. Six blocked appointments is six too many."

I hope you have the same opinion when President Obama or President Clinton (or will it be Rodham?)nominates someone on the very far left and the GOP is using the filibuster to stop them. I hope you write your the various GOP Senators stopping the nomination from going forward and tell them that his or her nominees deserve an up or down vote...somehow I doubt this will be your opinion then, but rather you'll support the blocking of "communist judges."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And did the Republicans make any attempt to stop Ginsberg?
Our "moderate" (read lib) judges on the court came (mostly) via a R president "reaching out" to the D congress.
And McLame is going to change that how?


They don't need you at all
They don't need the American people, they need 60 Senators and 218 members of the house or so.


Well, Akagi
McCain lied when he said Romney favors a time table for withdrawal for one.

The biggest lie he tells is that his $5,000 "pay if you want to" plan is not Amnesty...

I am confused
"I am a real conservative; so I will vote for Hilary." Huh, did I miss something. Your "values" will not let you vote for McCain (ranked by American Conservative Union at 82% +)because he is not conservative enough. Ok, I understand, you are a democrat; never been anything else and are being cute on this web site. Reagan said: “somebody who agrees with me 70% of the time, isn’t my enemy. He’s my ally.” McCain is my ally; I am a Republican - I will vote Republican. No one will con me into staying home or voting for the deranged party.
Not now and not ever!!

think about it, McCain mods
If McCain gets full power, do you really think he's going to get tough with his friends Teddy and the Dems? Will he fight for a strict constitutional justice? Will he be able to handle abuse by the NYT and Wash Post like W does? No. He's more likely to reach across the aisle. After he gives the Dem/libs and the press what they want, he'll tell his own party to calm down a little bit. If you like that, then vote for him.

I'd rather enjoy watching Hillary Obama try to get their bills past the American people.

McCain
"McCain is a liar."

Show me where? But how about Romney? He was pro choice in Mass not once but twice as a candidate for office and now he is pro-life? He was correctly quoted about timetables for Iraq and now he is never for them and then called McCain a liar for pointing out this fact. If anyone lied it is Romney...oh and Huckabee as well...the Jesus and Satan are brothers quote...think that was not done for the purpose of playing to anti-Mormon bigots?


McCain NEVER !!!
I wonder how Mr Greenberg and other McCain supportes know so much about McCains behaivor as a POW ??? While I honor McCain for his military service I have no real idea of how he has performed throughout his military career other than one of his numerous books detailing his acts of heroisim. While I have read a couple of these chronicals I have given up reading any others as they are a repeat, and repeat of his actions while being held a POW. Mc Cain certainly wasn't alone in the Hanoi Hilton and I wonder if there might be others who would disagree with the McCain account but refrain from doing so since they don't need the heartache and grief that Mc Cain gave the Swift Boat Vet's, when they called John Kerry a liar.
Evidently McCain enjoys 2 different sets of rules for relating acts of heroisim during war times. The set that allows McCain and any prominent politician to claim heroisim while the other set forbids anyone to question a politicians version, ie, McCain/Finegold.
McCain, Kerry, John Murtha, Charlie Rangle all war hero's !!! No others need apply as all positions have been filled.

No Fool Like and Old Fool
Greenberg is the latest to prove that old fools simply get older and more foolish.
Too bad. What was not revealed in his screed is that his day job is editor of editorials for the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, where Bill Clinton was allowed to hone his skills as a political fraud and con man...followed by Mike Huckabee.
All the while Greenberg was an observer who admitted in a “Frontline online” interview: “One thing that surprised me was how many times I had been willing to give Bill Clinton the benefit of the doubt, or had said ‘Well he may have been expedient in this case, but he will surely find his principles and continue”.
His words - and we're supposed to remain quiet about the deception and disloyalty of a John McCain, while being lectured by this character? I don't think so.
One wonders what Greenberg thinks of Huckabee’s New York Times quote, “Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers?”, which were the code words for the biblical bigots to show up at the polls and vote against Romney and definitely not for either Huckabee or McCain. So we have another Arkansas Governor right under Greenberg’s nose who engages in reprehensible conduct and Greenberg attacks talk radio personalities? And Ann Coulter? Please. Obviously Greenberg simply can't accept the fact that talk radio personalities have eclipsed him and others in the mainstream media – a very tough pill for him to swallow.
Here’s a bulletin for Greenberg and his tiny cadre of fans – pay attention now - John McCain has never achieved a 50% plurality in any of the primaries. Please read that again. Sensible, honest conservatives cannot tolerate having an unstable, unreliable, untrustworthy, mean-spirited character pretend to represent anything related to bedrock conservative principles. To ask us to ignore these facts is both offensive and insulting. Give us more credit than that.

Pimpernel
I think you nailed it - if the dems get into office, the war will be a glorious one that they will not want to lose for their legacy.

McCain is a liar - his ad here ends with "McCain - the True Conservative." Puhleeeeze. I'll join Ann and be a Hillary Girl, too.

McCain NEVER !!!
LuAnn Mason I agree with you 100 percent !!! Well stated.

Character counts.
The fool will "Bite his nose to spite his face."
The fool will expose his lack of wisdom by his willingness to join the other party to make a point and in the process lose all that is worth fighting for....a better America.

John McCain, when President, will do what is necessary to guide our country in the right direction. We need some one with courage and wisdom.

From most of the above comments it's obvious that most are willing to trash their votes and
suffer the consequences. How courageous and wise to vote for no one.






Character?
I disagree with a lot of John McCain's policy, but as Mitt Romney said at CPAC (paraphrasing) I agree with him on the war and am therefore willing to vote for him. It's too important an issue to withhold my vote or go dem. That being said, my agitation with this article is the premise that John McCain is a man of character. Neither his independent record nor lead in the delegate count (the two evidences offered) is a reflection of character. His independence is a a reflection of his thirst for power (see consideration of the VP slot under Kerry). And his lead in the delegate count is a reflection of the ignorance of voters. The record turnout in the primary elections this year (read more than just the political junkies who usually vote in primaries) combined with his name recognition and love affair with the MSM account for his nomination. Character has nothing to do with it. His lack of character is the one thing that almost convinced me not to vote for him in the general.

Great idea
Early2rise et al:

I wonder if you can get an invite to Hillary or Obama's Inauguration--since you'll help her or him to get in I don't see why not.

You people are about as bright as the Nader voters were.

McSlime
I'm writing in a conservative in November, there is no way I'm voting for McSlime to destroy both the GOP and the USA.

Greenberg the damfool
"Goodness. I like to think of myself as a conservative, too, but I try not to be a damfool."

And I like to think of myself as a billionaire, but the facts speak otherwise. You're no conservative, Paul.

Tell me who is the idiot? The Republicans who back McCain IN SPITE of their constituency SCREAMING FOR YEARS we won't support him, or the conservatives who keep their word and keep their priciples. You 'damfools' have been warned years in advance. You took us to be blind sheep who will back anyone YOU tell us to.

No facts in your article?
Did you bother to do any research for this article, or did you just make it up as you went along?

McCain has only won 4 states by simple majority. He lost Arizona by simple majority, only getting 48%. The 4 states he has won he has squeaked out the win by barely having over 50%. And then there are the states: Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and South Carolina. Two of the 4 won't even be red states come November. So, are we to believe that Connecticut and South Carolina will somehow sweep McCain to victory?

McCain does not have a majority of the base of the Republican party behind him. It is the actual election results, not polls, that bear that statement out as fact.

The rest of your article was just a rant. Not one really worth reading either.

I won't vote for McCain. (Unless the stars align and Romney is also on the ticket. Then I will hope for McCain's demise in office by stroke, heart attack, etc. But I don't really see Romney being on the ticket.)

I feel strongly that McCain is unfit for the office of the President of the United States. I could cite other reasons as well, but I feel he is unfit because of his temper, his policies, and the fact that he acted just like my Grandfather with Alzheimer's in one of the debates.

My Grandfather is a wonderful man, who has also served his country during war, and I love him very much. But, I would never vote for him to be president because I know his mind is slowly being robbed from him.

I'm sure there are other folks with other reasons, this is one of many of mine.

Who quit?
Harry Truman (one of the most over rated presidents ever) and LBJ--both quit (ran, fled, gave up, etc which ever term you'd like to use)rather than fight on--Truman over Korea (a war his administration helped to cause) and LBJ over Vietnam. It took the GOP under Ike and Nixon to end those wars--although in the last case it did so shamlessly and without honor.

Oh and if the Democrats had won in 1864, they would have quit that war--perhaps in retrospect maybe it would have been for the best.


SO what is the goal?
Nancy:

If your goal is not to be VP, what is it? Since it is impossible to keep McCain from getting the required 1191 delegates--even Carl Rove and Ron Paul have come to that conclusion--not to mention Romney.


ModMark
I get it now. You have confused Scarlet with Scarlet Pimpernel. I am "damned elusive". I fight to free the prisoners from the reign of terror. I'm not the genteel lady who makes dresses out of draperies.

I enjoy old movies and old tv series. So, are you Linc, Pete, or Julie;)

And how will life in these United States be under Bromide Obama?

Greg B
I agree wholeheartedly about Maverick. I preferred the great James Garner but Jack Kelly was pretty good as well. And the young Roger Moore showed up occasionally.

btw- for all those who think a Democrat will quit the war I ask you to look up the history and tell us which Dem ever quit a war. We all know that if Hillary or Bromide Obama wins, the media will, all of a sudden, find great victories going on in the war.

Laura Hollis
Worth reading? Hardly.

Go ahead, proudly cast your vote for McCain. I and others will proudly not join you.

"His Own Man"
Greenberg calls McCain "his own man". I think it would be more accurate to call McCain "unreliable," and occasionally "frighteningly unreliable."

And I think it's ironic that while vilifying other conservative pundits whose antipathy for McCain Greenberg doesn't share, he resorts to the venal name-calling he professes to abhor.

Finally--give conservatives some credit, Mr. Greenberg. I don't hold the views I do because some political commentator brainwashes me--neither Rush, nor Hannity, nor Coulter, nor YOU hold that kind of sway over thinking people of principle. Your intimation that people who disagree with you and agree with them is nothing short of insulting.

I can think for myself, been doing it a long time. And I don't trust McCain as far as I can throw him.

Oh puh-leeze
I'm so tired of know-it-alls who keep chanting that Mike Huckabee is running for Vice President. That's insulting to Mike Huckabee and to his supporters. We would not be investing our time, energy and money in his campaign if that were the goal. He and Janet Huckabee would not be working as hard as they are, if that were the goal. He could better ingratiate himself to the Party if he pulled out. Huckabee knows that he is far down the list for potential running mates.

The signs say "Mike Huckabee for President".

That's what we want.

LOL
Reader wrote: "I think John McCain is the absolute pits, where's my paycheck for being a talk show host?"

I think this will bump me up into a higher tax bracket...

Do we really know that MaCain didnt
break. What if he's the Manchurian candidate?

Rubin Navarette
has an article worth reading here:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/11/navarrette/index.htm l

Recognize yourselves, anyone?

Greenberg and others are wrong
Enough already! I'm tired of reading articles by these elitist country-club moderate Republicans, bashing talk-radio, bashing true conservatives, etc etc, just because they had the guts to point out McCains numerous (too numerous to list here) flaws. Let's face it, McCain isn't "his own man"...he's just always looking after #1, himself!

The only reason McCain has made it this far in the nomination, is the cold hard fact that the conservative vote was being split about 3-4 ways, the whole way thru, which is why he's such a weak candidate right now. McCain was getting the independants and elitist country-clubbers, as well as folks that don't know the issues very well but are smart enough to vote Republican at least. The Dem party has a whole lot of those folks..people who don't have a clue regarding the issues but vote Demo anyway.

I'm tired of all this bashing of talk radio folks like Hannity, Limbaugh, Ingraham etc by the McCainites...please, wake up to the fact that they had every right and every reason to point out McCain's flaws. If you don't like it, tough.

Having said that and not being a fan of McCain, we do need to all come together once this dust settles, and vote for him. The alternative to having a moderate Repub like McCain is Hillary /Obama and that would be a step towards tyranny and not good for our country's future.

frog
actually i am an elected school board member and i own my own business.

but that begs the question of why millions of conservatives do whatever these non-experienced pundits say.

ScarletPimpernel
One of the best TV shows ever...love the theme song...thanks for the reminder.

The original movie Scarlet Pimpernel was also one of the great ones.

Fight On!!

Test McCain now
Simple- he can today demand that the double fence right now be accelerated on a pace for completion by mid-2009- no need to wait for the fall election.
Only 7 miles are planned for Arizona this year- isn't he a Senator for Arizona?
He could today support the sheriff and county attorney who are doing their best to convict illegal criminals and deport the others. He could support the new AZ law that penalizes employers for hiring/keeping illegals. (It's working because many are leaving town.)
So do we think he will do it, today or next year?

WE WILL NOT ACCEPT MCCain! Don't give him the votes in primaries- he will fall short in delegates. Then DEMAND a true conservative by convention-time.

1912
Mel writes: Monday, February, 11, 2008 12:29 PM

"...I do not know for sure yet what I will do in November except that neither my wife nor I plan to vote for McCain. I am finally considering supporting a truly conservative party for this country...."

And do you remember what happened when the voters of the GOP left to vote for a truly progressive in 1912? Who won in 1912 and again in 1916? Do you remember when the far-left decided to vote for a truly "progressive" in 2000 and voted for Nader instead of Gore?

How many now regret that decision by putting Bush in office by doing so..who do you they would rather have now in office--Bush or Gore?

In 2010, I bet you'll have the same regrets if Obama or Hillary is in office and you voted for nutcase X of the third party instead.



Paul Greenberg's...
...column should be renamed 'How to Argue Like a Liberal.'

He's got all the main maneuvers down: demonize your critics instead of engaging in their valid points, bend/break/withhold the truth, come off with a snotty sense of superiority as if you're an idiot to even dare question his unshakeable truths.

Awesome. I am sooooo sold on McCain now.

nice try, Greenburg
Dismissing conservatives as talk radio drones is a cheap shot. I could say that your blind hatred of all things Clinton will lead you to the low point of voting for "stick in the eye" McCain.

McCain has already said Hillary will make a fine president. I believe him. I also want to get that good mushy feeling of reaching across the aisle to our friends on the Left and compromise with them. I believe this is what the American people want. Go Mods!!!

and also:

Who is the tall, dark stranger there?
Maverick is the name.
Ridin' the trail to who knows where,
Luck is his companion,
Gamblin' is his game.
Smooth as the handle on a gun.
Maverick is the name.
Wild as the wind in Oregon,
Blowin' up a canyon,
Easier to tame.

Just call us "Mavericks"

C. Parisho
McCain didn't give a damn what we thought back then - he still voted for amnesty - and he won't give a damn what you think in the future, especially when he has more of his liberal dem buddies in Congress helping him.

Where's my paycheck?
"John McCain, now the GOP's presidential nominee-in-waiting, is in trouble. But only with capital-C, talk show Conservatives."

I think John McCain is the absolute pits, where's my paycheck for being a talk show host?

Mickey @11:50 Post
Mickey said: "...and I say that it's time to forget Vietnam, and concentrate in honesty, integrity, and character, all of which McCain does not possess."

Mickey, I appreciate your saying that, and I believe that this is the biggest part of the issue. It is interesting that Greenberg has chosen as part of his title "Character Counts..." Boy does it ever. But through his apparently warped glasses he sees his man as a man of "character" and infers that McCain's critics are not.

I do not know for sure yet what I will do in November except that neither my wife nor I plan to vote for McCain. I am finally considering supporting a truly conservative party for this country. We have reached the point where the "mainstream" Republican party has gone too far left and though I am a long time loyal Republican I am tired of being vilified and betrayed on my matters of conscience.

So untrue
Onceamarine..a former fan of mine...

A system that takes 10 years plus for a person to immigrate legally in many cases, allows 1 million or more to enter without inspection, has industries that can't legally import the labor it needs (and yes, there are no jobs that American's won't do, but there are jobs that have too many openings and not enough Americans to fill them--people with college degrees aren't going to work in a chicken plant), that is a system that is in fact broken.


For whatever good reason PG's link is...
........not working so, without further a do;

A long time ago, you initially made me wonder why I bothered to read your column. Now I know better even though I have consistently tried to
understand you.

You may live in Arkansas, no qualification at all, quite the contrary, but you really belong in some N.E. great city with your attitude and
obvious education.

There is NO IMMIGRATION problem to be fixed except at the border and the work place. Legal immigrants who are admitted by procedure are
welcome.

Most TRUE Conservatives, you are not one, hate McShame with a passion only exceeded by their love of country. I will try not to think of you
as one of the others.

Your bias, racial profiling, culture profiling, religious profiling are totally out of order.

Go sit in the corner and say 1,000,000 times, I will not write about politics. I am not qualified to clean the boots of those whom you have dared to criticize.

You have shed no light on anything except who you are and who you are not.

Now go sit in the corner and consider your life's work and worth before committing any more misdeeds.

You do not know the real story of this dork when in the North Vietnam prison.


G. Gordon Liddy
Called those so-called conservatives (my term, not his) that would refuse to vote for McCain, the suicide bombers of the GOP--how correct. You people that make this claim remind me of a cult like Heaven's Gate or Aum Shinrikyo.


Jesse, thanks for ...
the clarification. I should have noted that, lacking a decent choice in the Presidential campaign, I will forgo voting for that office. I will vote for other offices up for election.

How so?
"Ask him to sign a statement saying that if he supports legalizing illegal imigrants, doing away with the tax cuts, doing away with the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and supporting any liberal causes/bills, he will resign immediately from the Presidency, and that this statement is a legally binding document that he will adhere to."

How can it be legally binding? Such an agreement can't trump the constitution, what happens if he signs it and then say "normalize" illegal aliens (the US "normalizes" about 180,000 each year now) and decides not to step down, how do you plan to remove him from office? Signing some bogus agreement doesn't rise to the level of high crimes I don't think.


For people like Steve who post drivel
that Mccain broke faith with his comrades. I am sure those who shared the accomodations at the Hanoi Hilton with him would be very surprised to hear that.

Don't believe that garbage folks, I am priveleged to know a few of those gentlemen also true American heroes and they support John Mccain unreservedly.

Another case of small men trying to bring down their betters, get a life!


Greg B, SD writes:
Please tell us
how you realistically expect to "hold his feet to the fire?" Once he's in, it's too late. Don't let him in!
****

We did it to Bush and McCain last year on the immigration/amnesty issue.

The same is how you hold ANY office holders fee to the fire. The people stand against that which they oppose and force the politicians to do the right thing, issue by issue if need be.

It requires an involved and active voter base who is willing to do more than vote every couple years and then ignores what our politicians are doing between election cycles.

The power of the people is the gratest idea of our founding fathers.

Frog
I feel you completely, but I would recommend that you still vote, only leaving the Presidential choice blank. We need all the Conservative Representatives and Senators we can get to counter whichever statist we have in the White House.

Steve 8:49 am - Yes, I will not vote....
......a Donkey Dung.

Thank you for bringing up what WILL BE the Demoncrat theme song on McShameful.

He couldn't win anyway, but the Dems will be totally sure of it months before election time, and PG has the nerve to talk up the fact that McShameless wouldn't leave before his brothers and arms did.

No, I don't suppose he wanted to lose the sweet deal he had with his "captors" and with the sweet things he was supplied with by them.

Character,??, who is kidding who.¡!¡!¡!¡!¡

Not this voter. I hate the rest of today's "still candidates", but not as bad as McStupid and McRevolting. There maybe a silver lining to having any Demoncrat elected. Voters will see what they are and are not and the GOP will think twice about supporting another like McScrewup.

He won't even come close to winning. Goldwater did better than this camels butt will.


John McCain
I have the answer for all of our problems with John McCain. Ask him to sign a statement saying that if he supports legalizing illegal imigrants, doing away with the tax cuts, doing away with the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and supporting any liberal causes/bills, he will resign immediately from the Presidency, and that this statement is a legally binding document that he will adhere to. I bet that he will never sign anything of this sort. I'm a Marine Vietnam veteran, and I say that it's time to forget Vietnam, and concentrate in honesty, integrity, and character, all of which McCain does not posses.

Semper Fi.

WMR

When
wiseone writes: Monday, February, 11, 2008 11:32 AM
Akagi is wrong again

"...Every nominee deserved an up-or-down vote. The "extraordinary circumstances" are what the Judicial Committee is for. Six blocked appointments is six too many."

I hope you have the same opinion when President Obama or President Clinton (or will it be Rodham?)nominates someone on the very far left and the GOP is using the filibuster to stop them. I hope you write your the various GOP Senators stopping the nomination from going forward and tell them that his or her nominees deserve an up or down vote...somehow I doubt this will be your opinion then, but rather you'll support the blocking of "communist judges."

I would like to know ...
EXACTLY:
what experience RELIGIOUSLIB has in the real world.

what elective offices has he held?
how many campaigns has he managed?

he knows nothing about politics but acts like he does.

to worship at the altar of people who do not know what they are talking about is illogical.

So, religiouslib, you are dead to me.

beowulfe
While Ann may be right about the disaster it would be to have a Democrat in office, I feel the risk of the harm that would be done to the nation as a whole, even in short 4 year run, will not be worth the possible reward of a return to Republican and may even make a Republican come back near impossible.

In 4 short years of a Democrat rule;

* All the work done in Iraq will be undone and we will have another state which opposes the U.S.

* Korea and Iran (and maybe other nations) will become nuclear powers. They may not even have to develop it on their own with the Clinton/China history they may be handed the bomb.

* Taxes will go up so much all the economic recovery we've had since 9/11 will be lost and we may even see a depression that makes The Great Depression look like an economic boom.

* Spending, especially earmarks, will continue to grow and it will be made harder for us voters to even see the evidence of it in the public record (they wanted to try to do that last year with Republican control of the White House).

* We will have government mandated compulsory coverage health insurance forced on us, and if we refuse to abide or even try to pay for our own health care out of our own pocket we will face jail time.

* We will see a massive exodus North as illegals get amnesty and citizenship and are positioned to abuse our social services and vote Democrat in every following election.

Need I go on?

McCain? No thanks
McCain has always been a snake - no better than hillary when it comes to values.

Sorry, but there comes a time ...
when one must draw that proverbial line in the sand. I have bitten my lip, held my nose, and closed my eyes for too long in the voting booth. I refuse to continue to vote for a candidate simply because he/she has an 'R' by their name.

I was at this same point in 1992 when I voted for Perot. Apparently, I let my guard down and fell into a coma after the Republican revolution in 1994, thinking we were on the right track.

These past 7 years of Bush with the R's in charge of the two houses (for most of the 7) have been like living with smelling salt under my nose. I'M AWAKE NOW AND YOU CAN'T HAVE MY VOTE SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU'RE AN 'R'!!!!

I hope to have Dr. Ron Paul as an independant in the fall. Otherwise, even though I work as an Election Official, I just won't vote.

exactly
what experience to the biased conservative media types like limbaugh and coulter and hannity have in the real world.

what elective offices have they held?
how many campaigns have they managed?

they know nothing about politics but act like they do.

to worship at the altar of people who do not know what they are talking about is illogical.

but then , some conservatives are not logical in their thought processes

Greenburg believes the fix is in
He writes:
Tuesday's election returns continue to reverberate: Mitt is now moot, Mike Huckabee is running stronger than ever (for vice-president), and John McCain, now the GOP's presidential nominee-in-waiting, is in trouble. But only with capital-C, talk show Conservatives.
--------

Why bother with elections
If the fix is in, tell us and the other 27 States can just forget having any choice and fore go with the ceremony of voting for a candidate.


Right Makes Might
writes, "Well, maybe not A.C. – it’s hard to determine what the he!! she’s up to, but it’s equally difficult to take seriously her professed fealty to the Hildebeast."

A.C. knows we are going to lose in the fall, and much prefers the evil we know rather than the evil we do not. I agree. Of course, she doesn't like Hillary. John and Hill are two peas in a pod. Either one will do pretty much the same thing in office. Obama is worrisome.

Akagi is wrong again
"You got all your SCOTUS nominees on the court and all but two of your appeals court nominees."

SIX nominees were denied up-or-down votes, not two.

As a result of the Gang of Fourteen we got three Appellate Judges confirmed that were being filibustered; Browm, Owen, and Pryor. On the other side, two nominees were specifically excluded by the Gang of Fourteen; William Myers and Henry Saad.

Four other judicial nominees never got an up-or-down vote because the Democrat minority in the Senate abused the filibuster privilege to stall their nominations until after the 2006 elections put the Dems in the majority.

Neither Roberts nor Alito were part of the original deal made by the GOF. In spite of this the GOF convened a separate discussion on Alito in which they acted like they were doing us all a favor to honor the spirit of their original agreement and not oppose cloture on his nomination.

The Cloture vote on Alito was 72-24 in Alito's favor. Even with a unanimous "nay" from the GOF opponents of Cloture would have fallen three votes short of the 41 needed for a successful filibuster.

In the case of Henry Saad, the nomination was blocked by one Senator, Carl Levin of MI. Levin had his nose out of joint because Helene White, his cousin's wife, had her nomination blocked by the Republicans during the '90's. This petty vengeance is what the GOF honored as an "extraordinary circumstance". The fact that the Republicans who blocked White were the MAJORITY is insignificant to the Democrats and Levin.

Every nominee deserved an up-or-down vote. The "extraordinary circumstances" are what the Judicial Committee is for. Six blocked appointments is six too many.

The biggest mistake
By the talk radio hosts has been the lack of support for the only conservative's that made a run for President.

Tancredo
Hunter
Ron Paul

And instead of supporting any of these men, they parlayed with the MSM in acceptance that Tancredo is a one issue man. (Utter bs)

That Ron Paul is a kook. (Uttter bs)

That Hunter..........? Nothing I can name why they did not support this man.

McCain's election
Will almost guarantee that we finally have conservative, constitutional judges. Throw away that chance folks and elect either Billary or the unordained charismatic preacher, and forget about all conservative judges for many years. By golly that will show him how to poke the movers and shakers in the eye won't it? Of course your kids and grankids will pay for years, but you will have shown McCain you won't tolerate thinking for himself, no matter how good the outcome.
The two most important things facing our country is oour safety and replacements on the SCOTUS

BRUTUS HAD CHARACTER

.....But it was all bad as Caesar learned to his dismay ...the treachery of Brutus plunged Rome into a Civil War and led eventually to his own demise ...

.....I see in McCain, not a man of principle, but an egomaniac who makes his own rules to suit himself ...in his speech patterns I detect the onset of the Dementia that Reagan displayed in his final year in office ...

.....I see a potential Jack Ripper ...the demented wing commander in "Dr. Strangelove" whose paranoiac delusions triggered the doomsday machine ...

.....I don't know that I am comfortable with McCain's finger on the nuclear button ...I mean how much harm could an Obama do in four years? .....COLOSSUS

WOW
WOW, Mr. Greenberg, you sure used a lot of neat words! Is that because you didn't have anything substantive or truly insightful to say about your friend John? I don't want a loose cannon as the leader of the free world. I also don't want someone who represents himself as he damn-well pleases, I want someone who represents ME and my values. Sorry, I'm funny like that.

One more thought for Greenburg
Who writes his admiration for J. McCain with this.


Greenberg
That's the trouble with John McCain; he's always been his own man. He just will not go along with the party line, anybody's party line. He's always given his interrogators a hard time, refusing to break no matter what blandishments, punishments or calumnies are applied.
---------

In Johns case of "he's always been his own man"
is described much better as a Loose Cannon.

Being former Navy, John will understand the term, and I hope Greenburg will ask John what it means.

He is oblivious is my guess

Michael Brown writes:
Ever since South Carolina, he turned into McCain's attack dog. Instead of attacking the front runner, he persisted in attacking Romney.
****

Um, need I remind you that Romney was the first of the Republican candidates to run attack ad's against his fellow Republicans back in November, many months before South Carolina.

Huckabee and anyone who passed Romney for the lead in the race was attacked and had lies told about them by his campaign and it's supporters.

Huckabee was only responding to Romney's attacks.

As for South Carolina, what McCain and his supporters did could have easily been done with out any "deal".

Huckabee and Romney were nearly tied in votes, McCain had some but not enough to challenge either for the win, so to take down one competitor he opted to have his supporters vote for Huckabee and give him the clear win over the Romney attack machine.

Huckabe could be an unwilling pawn in that tactical move by McCain, but it sounds as if you are like Romney and have a grudge against Huckabee for he perceved wrongs he has done to Romney.

Romney wronged himself in the race long before anyone responded and refuted his attacks.

Wailing and gnashing of teeth.
The GOP insiders / party elite war-gamed this when they anointed McCain as the next leader. In so doing they caculated us Conservatives would "have to fall in line". They're getting out all the big guns - Terror of democratic rule being chief among them.

We will survive even an obama white house. The justices who are retiring are libs anyway. At worst, apointing new Libs is a wash. Beyond that, yes, it will be brutal. The economy will tank. The war with Islamic Jihadists might take a down turn (but we can't lose, long term, no 4-year dem rule will change that.) THE WORLD WILL NOT END, WE WILL SURVIVE. TO QUOTE MCCAIN: "EVERYONE JUST CALM DOWN."

The truth and the question. The truth is, "The next 4 years are going to be terrible, because only liberals are running in Nov."

The question is, "Do we want to enable the disaster by having a Republican be blamed, or do you want Dems to be made responbsible, and therefore to be well positioned to clean up the mess in 2012?"

Immigration
Yes, bigmick? Are you also aware that the name Akagi is also the name of a Maya class gunboat, a volcano on the Kanto plain, a Japanese food company, a Japanese family name and a number of other things? Car to add anything else?

How do you plan to prove the person knew they were hiring an illegal? You don't have a national ID card in the US and the other documents are easily faked. If you failed to hire someone because you thought they were illegal, and weren't you be sued by the Justice Department.

As for marching people to the border that can't speak English--there is no requirement that you speak English to be a resident of the US. That requirement is only if you plan to become a US citizen--oh and for those over 65 and have lived in the US for 20 years if I recall, perhaps it is only 10, you can become a US citizen without the ability to speak English.

Marching legal residents to the border at gunpoint would be a violation of their constitutional rights--yes, the constitution protects non-citizens too. I'd love to be their lawyer when the US government had to pay a few million dollars for each case--I could retire to Fuji after that.

Sadly I am not a lawyer nor do I have a class action case against the US government that would make me famously rich so I could move to Fuji--oh well.


McCain is NOT INEVITABLE
Tell the RNC we WILL NOT ACCEPT McCain. We are free Americans; we don't have to bow low and accept the McCain garbage as our only option.
Where states have not yet voted- hold your nose if need be and vote Huckabee to keep him in the race and deprive McCain of the needed delegates.
Then, DEMAND that a true conservative come forth before the convention, one who is fit for POTUS- and that's not McCain!

We don't denigrate his Vietnam service; but I am not the same person I was at 20 and neither is he. In the last 25 years, he has proved he is an egomaniac, self righteous, belligerent, vulgar, arrogant and wants to rule, not lead the country.

If he were honest, he could right now demand that the double fence be accelerated on a pace to completion by mid-2009. He could support the Arizona sheriff and county attorney who are doing their best to convict the illegal criminals and deport the others. He is doing neither and would not, if he got the power of POTUS.

On Being a Damnfool
I'm glad you're trying not to be a damnfool. Try harder.

Dennis Goldston

Please tell us
how you realistically expect to "hold his feet to the fire?" Once he's in, it's too late. Don't let him in!

thebigmick
I'm with ya brother.

thinker writes:
RUSH LAURA ANN
They are our loudspeakers! Nobody had ever listened to real conservatives.
Do not vote for (Mc)Kain - he is in process of killing "Abels" ("ables")
****

Anyone who is willing to not vote or even aid a Democrat in their effort to gain office in protest to McCain is not MY loudspeaker.

It's fine if they protest McCain by voting for another conservative, Republican, or even an independent candidate. But the minute they state their intention to not vote if McCain is the candidate or plan to support/fund raise/vote for a liberal candidate they give up their title of "voice of conservatism" and become a Benedict Arnold to the movement and thus the enemy.

I'm not happy with McCain either. I'd much rather have someone else in the lead, but if it comes down to him vs Clinton or Obama I'll vote for him and then hold his feet to the fire. If he gets in office and fails to follow through with his promises (by his own actions, not resistance by congress) then I'll be the first to begin a campaign to remove him from office.

akagi--didn't we SINK that Jap flattop?
Yeah Yeah, that's the McBeech line--no sale.

The MacChurian Candiate sided with his commiequeer buddies to VET any REAL conservative out of the Process--he SHOULD have gone the 50 and Veep route--tells you all you need to know about what he's about.
As to the illegals--I don't HAVE to do any such a thing.
I can start by throwing everyone who hires and illegal in jail and confiscating ALL their assests. They'll wander back to Cesspool Meeheco without jobs.

And if that don't work Flatjap, as the Klingons' say "A thousand throats can be cut in one night, by a running man."

If we have to we round up every non-english speaking Mexican speaker and march em to the border at gunpoint.

they are Reconquista INVADERS, one Quisling or 40 million--you GET RID of em.

the big mick

Please Don't Vote for the VP
Don't pin your hopes on McCain dying in office. If he serves a full term, the people will not elect a Republican successor to his failed presidency.

Just say no to McCain, regardless of his VP choice.

Why voting Hilly is our duty ATT Greg
Ann is CLOSE to the idea. The McChurian Candidate is the slow, more deadly, poison of Socialism Lite--accustoming the victim (like we have been for decades) till Fatality is assured.

Hillybama is Socialism Straight. With the Straight Poison you can at least hope that the victim will CHOKE on it and puke it back up before the point of assured death is reached. NO such hope for The McChurian Candidate and Socialism Lite!!!

So where does your duty lie?

Again we KNOW the road McSame will lead us on.
We KNOW where it has gotten us and where it ends up!

So where does your duty lie?

Greg--fight on, lad.

the big mick Charter member (self-proclaimed)
of
O2C2 (b) "Out of Control Conservatives" (Backlash Brigade) and

Conservatives for Hillybama.

Immigration and the Gang of 14
For those that hate the Gang of 14...

You got all your SCOTUS nominees on the court and all but two of your appeals court nominees. Now, who controls the Senate today? And who may very well be president as of 1-20-2009? How many SCOTUS justices are over 70? McCain--outside of the blind--is looking pretty wise in that decision to keep the filibuster in place.

As for immigration, there are between 14-20 million illegals in the US today--the US deports only around 62,000 per year. It would take hundreds of years to deport the current numbers even if not a single illegal alien ever entered the US again. Deporting any significant amount of them is unrealistic and will NEVER happen. McCain understood this. The bill he supported was a bad bill--I agree--I opposed the bill as well but for no doubt different reasons than many of you.

But like it or not you are going to have to at some point "normalize" the vast majority of those inside the US illegally today. SO from a national security point of view which is better, to know who the 20 million are and remove the bad ones or have 20 million unknowns running around and you have no idea who or where they are?

Being a purist isn't going to fix anything, but I guess you can spout the Sean Hannity line that you are conservatives of principle.


You're over analyzing this
I appreciate the drama of your article, Mr. Greenberg, but I really think you're making this whole thing out to be something complex, when it fact it's very simple.

There are a lot of conservatives and liberty minded people that don't agree with John McCain's political philosophy. We see it as being very similar to the liberal political philosophy we despise on the left.

See? It's quite simple. But I guess writers such as yourself are known for your long-winded discussions of simple topics like this. I must admit, it's entertaining to read.

another Rubycon column on McCain ...
the Rubycons clearly are on the ascent but are clearly laying low having already put their skein of Repubilicrats and Demoncans on the presidential ticket; they'll be resurrected soon enough once Hillary or McShame staff their administrations; our foreign policy hijacked on behalf of another foreign power.

it's time for the logical conclusions of McCain/Feingold and other pseudo-efforts at reform be put in place. the two party system should be banned and the oligarchs put in their place. the MSM monopoly including the FCC rules that allow this to happen need to be abolished too. it appears that one or two Rubycon Enterprises seem to control all of our media including those that pay our "Conservative pundits" salaries and there really is no opposition press. Greenberg in building up Coulter appears to be playing the role of system legitimizer. Coulter unwittingly proves the point in endorsing Hillary as it doesn't really make a siredmundhillary bit of beans difference which neo-con (Hillary or McShame) gets in and Greenberg and Coulter both know this.

the only principled candidates of reform are people like Ron Paul and Ralph Nader; you know the cranks "the MSM" chews up and spits out for breakfast while the ignoramuses who don't vote in primaries and don't care go along with the two oligarch candidates pre-packaged and put before them.

Is there an expiration date on this col?
I ask because the sentiments expressed therein are so last Thursday. Greenberg seems to delight in criticizing the new media without first bothering to gather any facts about them.

The whole reason for the fusillade of attacks on McCain is to let the Republican establishment know that we view him as a second-rate candidate who falls way short in conservative credentials. McCain had better buy a couple cases of lip balm, because he’s gonna have to do a whole lotta kissing up to us on the Right if he wants our support.

Meanwhile, events have passed Greenberg by, and are about to lap him. Rush has already given strong indications that he’s in the party fold, and the others will be there shortly. Well, maybe not A.C. – it’s hard to determine what the he!! she’s up to, but it’s equally difficult to take seriously her professed fealty to the Hildebeast.

Credit where it’s due, however – I did enjoy the comparison between Chris Matthews and a “Head-on” commercial.

Mr. Greenberg
Great diatribe against those weasels and fools who just don't see your candidate the way you do. Your piece is almost laughable, though somewhat lamentable at the same time. Conservatives just love your candidate you infer, but those rascal extremists named in your article are trying to spoil Mr. McCain's playhouse. Where have you been during these primaries and caucuses? Roughly 70% of Republican voters have voted for someone other than McCain. One of those people now winning states from McCain is Huckabee who is running his campaign on a shoestring. I don't think you are going to win over enough conservatives with the kinds of put-downs contained in your article. It is this same attitude, along with a string of other things, that has turned so many against your guy.

Alan K--the REAL deal
Right and WRONG Allen.
There IS no Conservative worth voting for and as I stated above, analyzing both the past and the current vitriol from the Stealth Left GOP (Gahp! OR GOhP) REPUBLICANS (as Republicans) NEVER were.
You are WRONG about voting AGAINST however.

The WHOLE argument of the McWhores (actually McBeeches, but take your pick--I prefer the one that infers they spread more than legs) is;
"Hillary is WORSE"!

Lads, they have been pushing that false dilemma on us ever since The Gipper left office.

THE REAL question all of you need to ask is NOT the way THEY frame it TO GET YOU TO GO ALONG!

The REAL question is WHAT DOES THE ROAD LOOK LIKE WE have been HEARDED down and WHERE has it GOTTEN us?

I say we have been manipulated to the very BRINK of SOCIALISM and I CAN'T see that going a single step further down that Road behind The McChurian Candidate and the Conservative Free GOP wing of the Commiequeers DOES ME OR THE REPUBLIC a bit of GOOD!

As I have said elsewhere and often, THAT COURSE is MORE SURELY DESTRUCTIVE because the SLOW POISON accustoms the victim and is more sure!

Continuing the same slow poison CANNOT save us!!

CANNOT!

Voting AGAINST Hillary SAVES NOTHING !!! PURCHASES ONLY DELAY--and DELAY is MORE SURELY DEADLY!!!

That's what we've BEEN doing and LOOK WHERE IT GOT US! If the play isn't WORKING you gonna KEEP running it????

the REAL alternative below

mick

You are missing the point
You deride the conservatives leadership for bemoaning McCain and miss the point of their function. They are holding Juan's feet to thei fire and McCain had better select an excellent conservative with brains as Vice President... and Huckleberry ain't it. Good grief. If bull-headed happens to be replaced during office by whiney-baby who cares what party they pretend to be in?

GOP National Party Headquarters,
Hey GOP Headquarters, "we have a problem!"

John McCain may not be mentally fit to be President under the "Veterans Disarmament Act." Senator McCain known recently for his
angry outbursts over the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill hearings has shown symptoms to PTSD and admits to in his book.

"The Veterans Disarmament Act" signed into law by
President Bush will be his undoing. It is an
act that violates the second amendment, but is
the law. Senator McCain may not be eligible to
buy a small caliber weapon; yet would he be competent enough to give decisions on ordering out nuclear weapons?

Party elites get what they desreve
Here are a couple of clues and hints for all you Republicans who intend to vote for McCain in November. These clues and hints are what I call "indicators".

1. The argument for nominating McCain this time around has always been that he's the only one who can beat Hillary. Well, guess what. It turns out that Hillary may not even be the Democrat nominee. It turns out that many McCainiacs and party elites are actually rooting for Hillary to beat Obama because, without the big negative Hillary turnout, their man can't win in November. What masterful politicians these elites are. Their strategy for defeating Hillary has them rooting for Hillary. And then they wonder why we conservatives question their judgment.

2. The polls that convinced our party elites that we had to nominate McCain were created by LIBERALS. Our party elites, those geniuses who are now rooting for Hillary, have planned their 2008 election strategy on what is essentially the advice of liberals.

3. In order to defeat the liberal Hillary GOP elites have foisted a nominee on us that believes in global warming and says the government has to regulate the energy industry to stop it, wants to give amnesty to illegals, wrote a law restricting political speech, wants to give civil rights to terorists, voted against the tax cuts, and admits he knows nothing about economics. In other words, to defeat the liberal Hillary the GOP has nominated ... a liberal.

We have met the enemy and it is us.

The GOP has nominated McCain out of its fear of Hillary. But Hillary is so weak that it looks like Obama is going to win the Democrat nomination. Without the conservative base and negative Hillary turnout McCain will lose to Obama. How fitting and appropriate. The party elites will get what they deserve. Obama.

Ann Coulter hit it right on the head.
If Hillary is elected president, we'll have a four-year disaster, with Republicans ferociously opposing her, followed by Republicans zooming back into power, as we did in 1980 and 1994, and 2000. (I also predict more Oval Office incidents with female interns.)

If McCain is elected president, we'll have a four-year disaster, with the Republicans in Congress co-opted by "our" president, followed by 30 years of Democratic rule.

There's your choice, America.
- Ann Coulter

Flying Fig Alert
Character does indeed MATTER (not just "count") and Greengeld and the GOP hasn't got any--NEVER had. Did you notice fellow REAL Conservatives how Greengeld and the Party Elite have Fallen Back INTO THEIR REAL Character by beechin at Rush and the Radios and "the religious right" IN THE SAME LANGUAGE as the COMMIEQUEERS use?

Do you see NOW that they have ALWAYS HATED us in EXACTLY the same way their commiequeer insiders have? Isn't it obvious NOW who they have more in common with, who THEY identify with.

No wonder The McChurian Candidate is THEIR guy.
He is Dumbolcrap wannabe and SO are THEY!
I do believe they would have voted uber commiequeer Kerry in 04 in order to GET The McChurian Candidate!

The Conservative Free GOPper Wing (a Grey Gopher with a long nose) of the Dumbolcrap Party never wanted us, have stabbed us in the back whenever they could (member Robert Bork?) and, now that we won't fall obediently into their rumpup line, revile us like the poisonous snakes they really are and always were.

Time and way past time to GO, fellow Real Conservatives. Don't give a damn if we form a third party--but we DO need somekind of National Organization (other than C-Pac-inos--you know the McWhores) that will speak for us in a VERY Loud voice impossible to ignore or marginalize.
Some Kind of Conservative Union--we need some kind of Charter to state our Priciples, Goals, Purposes and Platform.
Somebody get moving on it.

the big mick

For shame, Mr. Greenberg
A-M-N-E-S-T-Y
Did you really enjoy spouting all that anti-Catholic and anti-Christian hate?

There is no Republican worth voting for
Just Democrats worth voting against.

One must choose the lesser of evils, but it's a soul-deflating experience. I hate having to choose between retreat and outright loss.

Never
I'm not Republican, but I am conservative. As a conservative I won't vote for a liberal. McCain is a liberal so I won't vote for him. Now of my conservatives friends or family will be voting for him either. The logic is so simple that this time we didn't need a radio to figure it out.

I am
a foot soldier in the anybody but McCain revolution. I am pleased to see that I will not be alone fighting the battle.

Fight On!!

Character Counts; OF John McCain

John McCain as POTUS! What is wrong with this
picture? He is a Vietnam Veteran yet when "THE
VETRANS DISARMAMENT ACT" came up where was
Senator McCain?

His rage and anger exploded during
the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" hearings
early in 07. He is known as a hot head on the
hill for numerous outbursts. He admits in his
book that he has symptoms of PTSD. This Act says
that veterans cannot buy weapons if they are
evaluated with PTSD. But if elected he will
be in charge of numerous weapons systems and
the US arsenal of "nuclear weapons!"

He is total loaner another symptom of PTSD. Why the double standard for the rank and file but
not a person for the highest office in the land?

Greenberg, future NYTs columnist
Get a grip! I listen to Laura, Rush, and Sean when I can. Their attacks are not personal, but based on substantive, philosophical disagreements. McCain is the rogue, not conservative talk radio. If you want to make a living bashing conservative opinion leaders, apply to the New York Times.

I'll vote McCain
or whoever is the Rep. nominee.

Any other choice is a vote for more secular liberalism, more interest group goodies, more and more tax and spend and spend, military disaster in the Middle East and at home, confiscation of my medical history and garnishing my salary to pay for doing it, and no ideas newer than 19th C. socialism.

McCain may not be "pure," but he's conservative enough for me.

Paul Greenberg
Mike Huckabee is running stronger than ever (for vice-president), and John McCain, now the GOP's presidential nominee-in-waiting, is in trouble. But only with capital-C, talk show Conservatives.
****

Paul, you are no better than the capital-C, talk show Conservatives with which you write about.

First, talking heads opining about other talking heads is about as important debating the color of tie a candidate wore.

Second you are dismissive of those in the race, just as all the pundits were of John McCain, Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul from the beginning yet those 3 who have been all but dismissed are all that is left.

I'd ask you and the other talking heads to get behind one of the 3 candidates which are left, but based on the track record of this race doing so is the death nail in the coffin of the candidates campaign.

As I said in another column; Get out of the opinion giving business and give us true and thorough analysis of facts, issues, and ideals of those running for office and we the voters will make our own opinions about them.

Conservative Resistance to McCain
Dear Mr. Greenberg,

As I read your article, I tried to discern the thrust of your piece. Were you just letting off steam? Were you trying to persuade?

I believe the last paragraph of your article tips your hand:

"Goodness. I like to think of myself as a conservative, too, but I try not to be a damfool. "

I take from this that you think conservatives should put up and shut up. That we should fall in line and vote Republican this fall. And that's ok, if that is your point, but if it is, you have camouflaged your message well.

If I were your English teacher, I'd make you rework this article and get to the point much sooner and more clearly than your parting shot last paragraph.

A very generous C-

Character DOES count.
Let's talk about McCain's character.

McCain feels that the First Amendment doesn't apply around election time.

McCain thinks that criminals from third world nations ought to be granted rights that tax-paying US citizens aren't even entitled to.

McCain would refuse to take away Osama bin Laden's satellite TV and Koran, even if in failing to do so a million American children would be tortured to death. (I'm betting if they were the children of illegal aliens, he'd be the one knee-caping OBL with a hammer himself, though.)

McCain thinks taxes aren't high enough, even though he is currently lying about his support to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

McCain believes that judges who base their decisions on the US Constitution, US Laws, and 200 years of US traditions ought to have their nominations opposed.

Character DOES count, and McCain's character is one of someone who HATES this country and everything it stands for.

Greenberg, Feingold, McCain all in 1 bed
You are NOT a conservative. No matter what you may preach to try to convince yourself that you are,- you are NOT!

I am not a Conservative Commentator, the ones for which you have so much disdain, I am an average God loving, country loving, STRONG conservative that thinks McCain is killing the Republican party with his love of Democrats, which you also think is pretty nice.

McCain will take this country down the road of Kennedy, Kerry, Feingold, Liberman - oh, I just realized, the last two are soul brothers of yours. No wonder you like McCain.

Horrible column
"Sure, the man may get things done - like finding a way to get conservative judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate."

McCain got SOME judges confirmed only by throwing other, competent, honorable, deserving nominees under the bus.

"He may even prefer fixing a system that's broken - like our immigration "system" - rather than just griping about it."

McCain-Kennedy would have fixed nothing. It would have forced us to live permanently with yet another broken government policy.

"And if he's proving right about the war in Iraq or on terror in general, well, that scarcely makes up for his unmitigated independence."

Being one of 50 Republicans in the Senate to support the surge doesn't even begin to make up for shamelessly running to every microphone he can to denounce waterboarding, try to close Gitmo, and give terrorists held there trials in US civilian courts with full access for their attorneys to classified information that is crucial to the WOT.

"Consider the case of Ann Coulter, certified banshee of the American right."

Has Greenberg ever called any liberal or Democrat a "banshee"? Or is Greenberg just another gutless RINO weenie?

"There's no getting around it: John McCain is just not popular with Conservative Spokesmen. It's only conservatives he appeals to, to judge by the election returns Tuesday."

McCain didn't win among conservatives. He won with moderates, independents, and crossover Democrats.

"But can John McCain unify the GOP in November? Maybe yes, maybe no. But if Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic presidential nomination this year, she'll unite the GOP for him. No wonder so many Republicans are rooting for her in the primaries; she may be their party's best hope..."

The McCain nomination actually has GOP elites rooting for Hillary. 'Nuff said.