Posted on 02/07/2008 4:18:27 PM PST by wagglebee
To all of you FRiberals out there, and that means all of you Rooty Rooters and Romneyites, it's your fault that the GOP is almost for certain stuck with McCain as the nominee. Now, I don't mean those of you who voted for Romney on Super Tuesday in an effort to split the vote, but the rest of you are culpable.
Conservative FReepers have spent the past year listening to the likes of you tell us that conservatives have "had their foot on the neck" of the GOP for too long. We were told that all that mattered was someone who was strong on terror. We were told that we needed someone with strong name recognition. We were told that generally the GOP decides whose "turn it is" and then nominates that person. We were told that we needed someone who can get independent votes. We were told that ANY Republican would nominate strict constructionists to the Federal bench. We were told that winning was all that mattered.
Now, some of you who said this were supporting Rooty, some of you were supporting Romney. But you were all pretty much saying the same thing: you preferred your candidates to a conservative. Some of you even got so upset with conservative FReepers that you ran away to start a RINO forum
Well, guess what? You were successful, though not in the way you thought you would be. It looks like it's McCain's "turn." But don't worry, McCain is a war hero and strong on terrorism (as long as we don't actually take terrorists into custody or try to keep them from crossing into the United States through open borders), he says he can get independents to vote for him, he says he will appoint constructionists, and most important, he has name recognition.
So, if your real agenda was to destroy the GOP, you very well may have succeeded. If your agenda was to create a "Democrat Light" party, you have almost certainly succeeded. If your agenda was to keep the Democrats out of the White House, you have probably failed.
But regardless of what your agenda was, you have harmed the United States of America -- I just hope it's not permanent.
The Hucksters posted anti-Rudy posts, Duncan Hunter supporters posted anti-Huck posts (as recently as early this week!).. hmm...you know... now that I remember more clearly (and I think you all can go back and look at the archives) It appears that most of the McCain supporters would post pro-McCain articles while the Hucksters were attacking their opponents but not posting pro-Huckabee posts. Since Huckabee is still in the race they may want to start telling me why I should vote for Huckabee.
Is George Allen Jr a Rino?? I am no fan of McCain, but to blame people here on FR is childish.
You can inform all you want. It’s your right. But if you inform others to the point that they do not vote for the only opponent McCain has, then we cant blame others for McCain’s victory.
Now we're down to The Bad, The Lame and The Crazy. I can't pick from this mess. In November, I'll pick the Republican (probably), but in March, I'm thinking I'll get a Dem ticket and vote Hillary. I don't think she can win, even if The Crazy goes third party (and he will).
“The Hucksters predominate this web site and they are largely to blame for giving us McCain.”
Absolutely. History repeats itself: Just as many Carter supporters were duped into voting for him because he was a Christian, now many Huckster supporters have been duped into helping McCain become our nominee.
I've been thinking about that. He is so utterly clueless and unqualified that I have to assume he is also inept.
Hillary is smart and unethical. Obama is clueless and I don't know his ethics. But he has done nothing that rates as an accomplishment.
My guess is that his administration would have similar results.
That might be something to celebrate.
Team Clinton would definitely get things done to hurt us soon and hard.
I did that.
Did it effect events? Not at all.
You may want to check facts before you allow yourself to be duped into believing nonsense. His health care plan (endorsed by Heritage Foundation) was not government run, and he didn’t give gay marriage to Mass. but rather was the one who tried to stop it.
(Bork’s quote as to why he endorsed Romney):
“No other candidate will do more to advance the conservative judicial movement than Governor Mitt Romney. He knows firsthand how the judicial branch can profoundly affect the future course of a state and a nation. I greatly admired his leadership in Massachusetts in the way that he responded to the activist court’s ruling legalizing same-sex ‘marriage.’”
Your tagline"A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75
Ah....the irony! ROFL!
In fact the idea that FR has that kind if influence is absurd, if it did Thompson would have been the nominee.
If it did, I wouldn't point the the liberal advocacy here, rather the "I'm staying home" position often expoused. Perhaps you missed it, but lots of GOP voters did just that, stayed home. Those who advocate no position (not suggesting that's you) don't have much to complain about.
I noted that a few times during the 2006 elections. While I can't attribute their losses entirely to turnout, I'd speculate that we might be having a different discussion today if enough had turned out to reelect Rick Santorum and George Allen.
Mr. Waggle - I contend that Romney was a conservative, more of a conservative than anyone else in the race and as conservative as Hunter, and Hunter never put his own money into the race and was merely on an ego trip.
Hey wagglebee, I thought we were FRiends!?! I became a Ron Paul supporter today!
On the other hand, I like the thought of NOT being old enough to vote. ;o)
Hey wagglebee, I thought we were FRiends!?! I became a Ron Paul supporter today!
On the other hand, I like the thought of NOT being old enough to vote. ;o)
“If you don’t believe as I believe, every thought, every word, every utterance, you are unworthy of my vote. If you can’t do it precisely as I dictate, you are unworthy of my vote.
The fact I will elect a Marxist by disapproval of the minutest perceived imperfection is not relevant. Death and dishonor are preferable to casting a vote for someone who lacks the perfection of credentials I demand.
The country can go to hell, but I will remain true to my biases and even some personal bigotry while not voting or while actively killing the candidate I find repugnant. My thoughts will remain pure even as the country is destroyed and I can smugly say “not my fault, I laid out a pure and perfect course”
/sarc>
You can blame whomever you like. I blame “The Evangelicals.” But this all so much crap. The fact is that the base did not get behind an electable and acceptable candidate. The real conservatives ran pathetic campaigns.
Do you really think that FR has that much influence?
” I contend that Romney was a conservative, more of a conservative than anyone else in the race and as conservative as Hunter”
That’s the problem here. Defining ‘conservatism’. Romney and Hunter differed greatly in policy and history. The record proves it. You can argue the meaning of ‘conservative’ but you can’t argue their historical differences.
We can’t agree on what is conservative much less on a candidate as long as people are willing to settle for the lowest common denominator.
“The Evangelicals” didn’t vote for McCain. RINOs did.
Without “The Evangelicals,” we would have had President Gore for the past 8 years and a solidly Democrat congress since the 1930s.
Every national success conservatives have had since 1980 is due in large part to “The Evangelicals.”
The next time a conservative Republican wins a national election without “The Evangelicals’” support will be the first.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.