Posted on 02/07/2010 5:09:07 AM PST by rabscuttle385
(CNN) - The newest member of the Senate will soon hit the 2010 campaign trail for Arizona Sen. John McCain.
A McCain source confirms Sen. Scott Brown, R-Massachusetts, will campaign with the 2008 Republican presidential nominee in early March. McCain is facing a primary challenge from former Rep. J.D. Hayworth.
(snip)
Former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin will also hit the campaign trail for McCain at the end of March.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
He was a great senator at one time, but his desire to be a favorite on the press party circuit and a player in Washington has done him in. He outdoled Dole during that awful presidential campaign.
Those people here defending him I believe to be quite delusional, but I'm not going to get into a urinating match with our usual Freeper Rino’s. They never learn and won't.
Finally, somebody who gets it. Taking down McCain isn't about "purity." We're not talking about going after a good, solid conservative who maybe just did one or two things that wasn't quite copacetic. We're talking about taking down an alpha bull in the Senate RINO herd, an individual who has done his level best to confound and confute conservative efforts at advancing our principles every step of the way since at least 2000. There's a difference between tagging a guy who's 95% with you to replace him with another guy who's 95% with you, and tagging one who is 60% with you and replacing him with a 95%-er. People who don't get this very basic and simple point, well, there's probably nothing that can be done to help them.
Hayworth can win in AZ. People out in AZ hate McCain - they just vote for him because he never has significant primary opponents, and the Democrats are worse. I think it's time to give the good people of Arizona a Republican senatorial nominee that they can actually vote for, and not feel like they have to take a shower afterwards.
DeMint wass a big supporter of Mitt Romney last go round and I don't mean that it was an endorsement of last resort. Mitt was a ground floor organizer and fund raiser for Mitt while Mitt was still testing the waters and he continued his fund raising and campaigning for Mitt all the way through the campaign.
That means that we conservatives need to work that much harder to win it for JD. It's just a shame we have to be fighting against Palin, instead of with her.
Big deal. DeMint himself is a conservative, and deserves the full support of any conservative worth the name. Palin, while I like her, I don't like her as much as DeMint. Palin has a little too much of the "tax them big ol' companies" mentality, like Huckabee has. Populism is not always a good thing.
That bears repeating, so, I will:
"IT'S TIME FOR HIM TO GO!!!"
Brown "can do it" because we already know that he's a "soft" conservative at best, and will likely be prone to the sort of "go-along-to-get-along" mentality that drives too much of the GOP as it is.
Palin, on the other hand, was touted as being the Last Best Conservative Hope For All Mankind - yet, she's turning into exactly the sort of sellout compromiser that we'd all despite if it were anybody else but Saint Sarah of Wasilla.
Big deal(DeMint supporting Mitt) . DeMint himself is a conservative, and deserves the full support of any conservative worth the name
Let me see if I have this correct.
Brown can support the RINO McCain because Brown isn't conservative.
DeMint can support the RINO Romney because Romney is conservative.
Palin can't support the RINO McCain because um, because ah, because what???
May as well bang your head against a brick wall with the progressive, pro-amnesty types...they’d re-elect George Bush if they could.
You are wrong. Palin never "taxed" oil companies. You should really the learn the facts about what she did.
Um...no...I don't rightly recollect saying this. I'm of the opinion that Juan should be dumped for a more reliable Republican.
Look, if the voters in AZ want to send this... this... person back to DC for another 6 years, that is certainly their prerogative. I, on the other hand, will be sending the GOP/RNC a little "valentine" by sending some cash to Juan's more reliably Republican opponent, JD.
I hope this doesn't post twice. Sorry.
True.
Sarah's endorsement of McCain is a mistake.
Similar to the way Reagan made mistakes. Does every poor SC decision O'Connor made on the SC have Reagan's name on it. Does every new illegal alien in this country have Reagan's name on it because Reagan gave illegal aliens amnesty in '86? What about the abortion bill Reagan signed when he was governor?
All those were mistake made by our greatest modern day president.
Nicely said, rabs!
Oh, LOL! I have another (rather bad) McCain ACU lifetime score analogy: My lifetime dress size is an 8!
Giggle. I crack me up.
Snicker. Note, too, that I'm being really rather charitable here, and I used myself, rather than MeggieMac in the "lifetime dress size" rating.
Because your analogy is false and misleading, that's why.
DeMint, for instance, endorsed Romney early in 2007, when there were basically no credible Republican candidates in the race - all you had at that point was, well, McCain, who had basically been running for President nonstop since 2000. The same McCain that Palin has chosen to endorse. DeMint's choice was the more conservative of the two. Palin's is most definitely NOT.
DeMint chose the most conservative candidate at the time. Palin has chosen the most leftists, in the context of the Arizona GOP Senate primary. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Actually, she DID. She pushed through a $1.5 billion "windfall tax" on oil companies - and that at a time when Alaska had a budget SURPLUS. She was all about forcing the oil companies in Alaska to "share" their hard-earned profits with the good people of Alaska, even though most of those people had done nothing to help the oil companies earn those profits in the first place. Hardly a record that inspires confidence in her commitment to fiscal conservative principles. Like a said, being a populist isn't always a good thing.
But hey, it's for the kids, youbetcha.
The continuous invoking of Reagan to provide cover for what Sarah Palin may or may not do is becoming tiresome.
But to address your brief Reagan ‘factoids’...
a.) Justice O’Connor was believed to be a conservative jurist at the time of her nomination, and she had the seal of approval of no less than ‘Mr Conservative’ himself, Senator Barry Goldwater. Ronald Reagan trusted Barry Goldwater like a brother, and had no reason to doubt his recommendation. Comparing the O’Connor nomination to the SCOTUS with Sarah Palin’s endorsement of McStain is disingenuous, O’Connor’s judicial record did not suggest that she would move to the center/left after she was confirmed. McStain has PLENTY of history which should have been instructional to Sarah Palin prior to her agreeing to endorse him. But no matter, “she owed him and she’s paying her debt” as the current mantra goes and that’s fine.
b.) Reagan’s actions regarding what you call the ‘Amnesty of ‘86’ were far more responsible and fair minded than the amnesty con game that RINOs like George W. Bush, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and others (not to mention the latest Dead Kennedy, Fat Teddy) tried to foist upon us, go back and read that legislation and you’ll discover for yourself that it was a good bill, and the reason we have millions MORE illegals in America today is because after that ‘86 legislation was signed by Reagan, subsequent administrations FAILED TO UPHOLD THE LAWS so far as our borders and national security is concerned. That most certainly was not Reagan’s fault.
c.) The abortion bill Reagan signed when he was governor was actually intended to REDUCE the number of abortions in the State of California, but unscrupulous doctors and abortionists used the loophole about performing an abortion “to preserve the health of the mother” to include a woman’s MENTAL state, i.e. “oh, oh, I can’t be pregnant, this is terrible, its going to ruin my life”, Abortionist: “there, there, you sound emotionally stressed, this could upset your whole mental equilibrium, fortunately the law allows for us to ‘fix’ this little problem in your belly...”, Reagan later admitted that they pulled a fast one and that in retrospect he would not have signed that legislation had he known how it would be manipulated by the pro-abortion crowd.
Anything else you want to discuss?
You are right in that the lessons have NOT sunk in -- but then again, we are not talking about the same lessons.
It's crazy when "the perfect becomes the enemy of the good" -- but my question is, "Where's the good?" The only thing about McCain that could qualify as "good" is the "R" after his name, -- and in fact that is actually more of a liability, given who he is and what he does, than an asset. Better a Leftist Liberal try to bring the bizarre kind of immigration and campaign "reform" than McCain, a powerful Republican!
If McCain had a "D" next to his name (which is more accurate), there isn't a person on this board who wouldn't be tearing him a new one, but because he has an "R", he'll get his followers here, defending him.
McCain should be shown to the door while we still have time to reorganize and turn this country around, because McCain represents -- at least as much as Obama -- everything that is wrong with Washington!
Brown can support the RINO McCain because Brown isn't conservative.
DeMint can support the RINO Romney because RomneyDeMint is conservative.
Palin can't support the RINO McCain because um, because ah, because what???
Because your analogy is false and misleading, that's why. DeMint, for instance, endorsed Romney early in 2007, when there were basically no credible Republican candidates in the race - all you had at that point was, well, McCain, who had basically been running for President nonstop since 2000.
Wrong.
You ignored what I said. DeMint was a ground floor organizer and fund raiser for Mitt in 2006 while Mitt was still testing the waters and while there was NO announced candidates in the race and several years before the presidential election.
Your potrayal of DeMint's support of Romney is misleading and my above question to you still stands.
Sarah Palin will ruin all her credibility and her whole movement if she does this - and she will. http://fns.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/07/web-exclusive-palin-endorsing-mccain/
McCain is not only impure, he's a democrat whore (politically). McCain needs to be thrown out with Arlen, Olympia, any Bush who even thinks of running for an office, et al. They have ruined our party and are used against us by leftists all the time (such as, "Well, even Bush supported high spending and TARP...." and, "Well, even Republicans such as McCain and Snowe supported.....") I'm tired of apologizing for my own.
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.