John McCain, you're right, and it doesn't matter -- your words carry no weight, because you have no consistency. We don't know who you are. You've gone from a conservative to Barack's best buddy, to the Press' lap dog, to whatever anyone wants you to be at the moment -- you are the consummate politician that everyone is supposed to hate -- talking out of many and varied sides of your mouth. John, just pick a side - none of us care which - and stick with it.

Don't like smarty, "I'm as smart as God" spoutings like this - no, God doesn't have to apologize to Sodom, or to anyone else. We may not like it or understand it, and it may depress us -- but it's God's plan -- not ours.

And by the way -- we love to talk about our "flawed" candidate. How could any candidate have been more flawed than Obama? Trillions in debt -- Obamacare -- a terrible record in National Security, and the cloudiest "open administration" in recent memory. We should have trounced him. But, my fellow Republicans -- you went into a pout, because Ron Paul wasn't running, or Rick Santorum, or whoever "your" favorite candidate was. Romney wasn't "really" a conservative (like Obama is), so you stayed home, waiting for that perfect candidate. Millions of Republicans didn't vote -- didn't care if Obama was re-elected . . . so, he was. We can't blame anyone but ourselves.

I'm sorry, but I vehemently disagree with this premise, as stated in Mr. York's article: "Romney is an able, accomplished, intelligent and hard-working man, but Republicans knew from the start he was an imperfect candidate. During the primaries, GOP voters tried every alternative possible before finally settling on Romney. He remained a flawed candidate in the general election." The intent of every primary -- Republican or Democrat - is to pick the best candidate from those who are in the running . . . . that's what we did. And then, we told everyone that would listen, that he wasn't good enough. WE beat our own candidate. We'll never win, as long as we have "loser" stamped on our voter registrations.

Ron Paul could have been an "American Hero", if he could have ever beaten back his inner dingbat - but too often, that was the persona that rose to the surface and destroyed what good ideas he could have had. Was this a great speech? Absolutely - but his strange goofiness and his weird ideas that went right alongside his good ones made it impossible for him to accomplish what he could have.

The Republican party started losing this election back during the primary season, when we started tearing each other apart, demoralizing our base, and giving the Democrats all the ammunition they'd need for the general election. We have to stop with the "is he conservative enough" debates that divide us into 6 different Republican enclaves from the outset, and remember that we have a common goal -- to collectively win back the Congress and the White House . . . . . not with MY candidate or YOUR candidate, but with the REPUBLICAN candidate.

My problem is that Obama and his team won by lying and distorting and burying the facts . . . . . by destroying the reputations of truly good and decent people . . . . . . of viciously attacking what is good and traditional and right . . . . and the voters said, "right on!". If that's what it takes to win, are we capable of sinking down to their level? Do we want to?

I've read 2 analyses today that both said that there was a big drop-off in (1) white voters, and in (2) rural white voters . . . . . in other words, the people that should have been there to counter Obama's obvious solid base in the black community. Why? The one reason I saw was that the Obama strategy of demonizing Mitt Romney . . . . of making him into that 'super rich' person who got that way by closing factories and firing people, and who couldn't possibly care about "you" . . . . worked. So instead, we're left with 4 more years of an arrogant, self-absorbed, statist who will continue to steal more of our personal and individual rights from us . . . . . learn to think for yourselves, voters.

Isn't it always amazing how smart we all are after the election? How we know what SHOULD have been done? In my oh-so-humble opinion, Romney/Ryan was a great ticket. The reason they didn't win? A big part of the American electorate are dopes: they get their news from the Daily Show, from Stephen Colbert, from Letterman & from whatever the girls on The View are saying. We had decent, intelligent, respectable men with experience, ideas and vision running . . . . . and Obama is "cool". If we have to aim for "cool", and have to compete for a place on "The View", I'll be just as happy in 2nd place.

"Candy Crowley Self-Destructs"? Wishful thinking, in its highest form. Candy Crowley and Martha Raddatz, and most all of the "news" voices on TV and radio serve simply to impress each other -- and to do so, they have to, at all times, support "the team" . . . . the Democrat team. Both Candy and Martha were roundly cheered by their organizations, and that's all that matters to them - they didn't hurt their careers, because they're doing what they're hired to do. They didn't hurt their reputations, because they're not expected to do any better.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. Christ did not establish the church to be a political force in the community or the country, and the fact that some churches do it, and get away with it, doesn't mean that those who don't are shirking their duty. Those who push the church toward a more active political role are simply weakening the church - demeaning and misrepresenting its mission. The minister who is chafing at the bit to stand up in front of his flock and preach politics would be best suited looking for a new career - as a politician, perhaps.