[wagglebee]

Ping.

I don’t write many vanities, but the RINOs have screwed us this time.

[RDTF]

what a load!

[Gene Eric]

We have a systemic institutional problem that is far more serious than FRiberalism. Despite the disaster of the last Congressional elections and the misrepresentations from our own party, nothing meaningful has evolved that offers near term rewards. To the contrary, we’re getting poked in the other eye by an element within the party that no longer reserves a modicum of self restraint for its animus to the Conservative core.

It is probably expected that we will be left to mutter amongst ourselves as the self-anointed Republican leaders redefine Conservatism extinguishing whatever integrity remains. I’m not sure where the road to hope forks from this reality, but I guess we shouldn’t stop driving.

[tioga]

we are all in pain......

[dmw]

“I don’t write many vanities, but the RINOs have screwed us this time.”

Yes sir, they indeed have. I could not agree with you more.

[LS]

Talk about passing the buck. It was the “ultras” here who tore down every good alternative to McCain. Well, you wanted Capt. Queeg, you got him.

[8mmMauser]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

8mm

[mission9]

Anybody who tried to push the Fred Thompson Candidacy, after I clearly, from first hand, eyewitness testimony told everyone that I could that he was not a serious candidate, has only themselves to blame. Romney was not a perfect candidate, but given the choices, do the math.

The margin of victory for Romney was stolen by sour grapes Rhetoric of which your vanity is a prime example. Grow up.

[MarkL]

I don’t write many vanities, but the RINOs have screwed us this time.

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, for "real" conservatives, "I didn't leave the republican party. The party left me."

I saw a posting here just the other day that I'm starting to agree with... "Republican" no longer implies conservative. And I'm now thinking that the "RINOs" are actually conservatives, since it seems that those in power in the republican party seem to have no use for them any more.

Mark

[Das Outsider]

I'll reprint your entire post, Wagglebee, because you took the time and effort to write it, and I think you have some legitimate concerns.

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.

It is my understanding that most of the Rooty Rooters fled the scene and found a more conducive environment for supporting liberal Republicans on Fast Asleep. Romney is another story. Supporting Romney over McCain didn't put Hurricane where he is today, and will probably be come nomination time. If we're talking pure politics (yes, it's an oxymoron), I have to ask, why aren't Huckabee supporters branded with the charge? The "liberals" on FR that I've talked to supported and voted for Mitt Romney against McAin't-a-conservative.

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.

You've just described the Giuliani appeal. Sure, he's terrible on everything else--but at least he supports "the War." The hyperbole, and I'm not knocking hyperbole if done right, was particularly rank.

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.

Strong name recognition is fallacious all day long, but in the business of politics, which holds contempt for logic and critical thinking equal to that of mass marketing, it doesn't matter. Politics is selling, and it need not be honest selling. With regard to judicial nominees, I have to wonder what kind of judges Giuliani appointed, and what kind of justices McCain opposed. "Strict constructionist" is as meaningful as "free money" until one gets at the candidate's meaning.

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.

See above. Some of the Fast Asleep gang are still on FR, and that isn't necessarily a scarlet letter. However, the aforementioned Rooty Rooters have a whole lot of answering to do, and there's still a lot of crow to be eaten. Would someone please pass them the mustard?

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.

Are you aware that John McCain was a POW in Vietnam? It's beginning to get old. I seem to recall another Vietnam veteran going on and on about his service record. Oh, wait--that was John Kerry, the guy whom McCain considered running with. One of the biggest reasons why I am against McCain is that he is absolutely clueless when it comes to legal and illegal immigration, and that it is a serious national security issue. It McAin't about lettuce pickers and sob stories, my friend.

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.

In all fairness, I think the Democrat Light stuff was in the works much earlier than 2007. Blaming Rudy and Romney supporters for the--as I perceive it--overall left-leaning trend in the GOP may not be the way to go, but I understand your outrage.

But regardless of what your agenda was, you have harmed the United States of America -- I just hope it's not permanent.

As long as we continue to value winning elections over and above principle and philosophy, it's going to be permanent. I have to wonder if some presidential candidates of the last century, like the great Teddy Roosevelt, were terribly worried about "winning the moderates." I don't think TR would have met with La Raza, either.