Medved Gets Conservatism Wrong

You're primary source here is Mark Levin, who (along with Hugh Hewitt) have become nothing better than shills for the Romney campaign and National Review who has endorsed Romney. Santorum likes to talk about how disloyal McCain is, but that didn't stop him from enlisting McCain to campaign for him. And if Santorum is so loyal to the conservative movement, why did he support Arlen Specter over a genuinely conservative Pat Toomey in 2004. Santorum's ire seems a bit misplaced.

Why not give the tired amnesty trope a rest. You and the rest of the Republican Designated Geniuses use that term as an excuse for not actually analyzing the immigration reform bill. If McCain is not conservative because he supported penalizing illegals then Reagan was downright liberal for granting actual amnesty to illegals without penalty. Please, can we actually start THINKING about these things instead of just engaging in mindless demagoguery?

By the way, Medved is probably the smartest guy on talk radio and he has been scrupulously fair to all the Republican candidate (except Ron Paul). Even the articles you cite show that he is defends Romney and does not smear him as you do McCain. You harm the entire conservative movement when you smear the intentions and good will of other conservatives.

Give me a break Larry; opposing McCain (and Huckabee) does not make one a shill for the Romney campaign. Levin has repeatedly urged voters to support either Romney, Thompson, or perhaps Ruddy in the primaries (depending on location) to stop opposing McCain and Huckabee. Anti-McCain does not = Pro-Romney.

As for the 'tired amnesty trope' why don't you try educating yourself and go read Robert Rector's Heritage Foundation study of what McCaiin-Kennedy would have done to this country, in terms of cost and culture.

As for Reagan, I agree it was a mistake. The enforcement measures we were promised in return for the amnesty were never delivered on. However, we have one advantage over Reagan - hindsite. You would have us ignore the lessons of history and do it all over again.

As for my sources, you're forgetting Allen, DeMint, Bork & Toomey as well as Delay.

As for NR, if it is just that they are pro-Romney, why have there been so many pro-Thompson posts over there?

I used to listen to Medved every day but he lost me about 3 years ago. His shilling for amnesty, whining about the term 'RINO', support for Republicans like Chaffee and Jeffords, etc, etc. got to be too much. The straw that broke the camel's back was how he dealt with the Terry Schaivo case.

He's great on history and spotty on politics. I've got better uses of my three hours than listen to him anymore.

You and your ilk harm the conservative movement with your fallacious attempts to redefine conservatism.

An ‘inventory’ of my sources:

Five interviews conducted by Mark Levin wherein the interviewees speak for themselves:

- Senator DeMint
- Senator Santorum
- Senator George Allen
- Judge Robert Bork
- Pat Toomey

One video of Tom Delay

One article by by Mark Levin posted at National Review

One Article by Katherine Jean Lopez of National Review

One Article by Human Events

One link to Freedomworks.org documenting McCain’s vote against repealing the ‘Death Tax’

Three video interview of McCain:

- One with Lawrence Kudlow
- One with Hannity & Colmes
- One with Tim Russert.
- One article by Thomas Sowell posted at
National Review

One link to Ace of Spades HQ containing a quote of McCain reaffirming his opposition to drilling in ANWR (referencing National Review).

That is fifteen separate sources (eleven if you want to be silly and lump the articles by Levin, Lopez & Sowell and the Ace of Spades link all under National Review).

Seven of those sources are actually McCain himself:

- the Human Events article is simply an
inventory of McCain quotes
- the Freedomworks.org page simply documents his
vote on the ‘Death Tax’
- the quote posted at Ace of Spades HQ /National
Review is McCain in his own words
- and the three interviews.

Only one of those sources is Levin speaking for himself. Thus your claim that my ‘...primary source here is Mark Levin, who (along with Hugh Hewitt)’ is simply and utterly ignorant, wrong and without basis in fact.

Further, you wrote that as if opposition to McCain were limited to a small corner of the conservative universe. To the contrary, I could have cited plenty of others including Michelle Malkin, John Hawkins, Ann Coulter, many of the posters at Redstate.org (and, yes, I know he has supporters there as well), most of the ‘big dogs’ in talk radio, and on and on and on.