AZ-Sen. 2010: (RINO) Brown to campaign for (RINO) McCain (will be followed by Sarah)

CNN - Political Ticker ^ | 2010-02-05

[FreeReign]

The continuous invoking of Reagan to provide cover for what Sarah Palin may or may not do is becoming tiresome.

To invoke a valid comparison to Reagan the gold standard of modern day presidents is never tiresome and I would hope it never becomes politically incorrect. Your false accusation is tiresome.

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...

Amnesty is amnesty. It promotes more illegal immigration. Even if the Democrats followed through on all their promises the damage would still have been done. As I said, it was a mistake.

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

Of course Reagan was pro life. Of course Reagan wanted to reduce the number of abortions. But allowing such a loophole that the abortionists could take advantage of was a mistake.

As I said, Sarah's endorsement of McCain is a mistake. Ronald Reagan who was our greatest modern day president made mistakes. It didn't stop my support of Reagan. And when the time comes and I have to pick a candidate for nomination in 2010, Sarah's McCain mistake alone wouldn't stop my support of her.

Anything else you want to discuss?

I wasn't finished with the present discussion.

[SharpRightTurn]

Don’t know how many AZ Republican primary voters Brown will sway. Not many, I would think. I suppose if a Brown-like candidate is what someone wants, they already support McAmesty anyway.

It’s time for conservative to work hard for Hayworth. Go, J.D.

[duckln]

You ran amok by including 2 Rinos in the title. A real cheap shot.

[mkjessup]

To invoke a valid comparison to Reagan

What you consider 'valid' remains a question of perspective, but I'll try to make this a little more clear to you:

Sarah Palin has energized the conservative base, there is much to like about many of her positions, but until she actually declares her candidacy for elective office, she is just one more political celebrity.

While Sarah Palin has many qualities that would certainly endear her to many Reaganites, she is not at all in the same league as Ronald Reagan, not at this point in her political career. The fact is, her experience could be compared to that of Ronald Reagan about 1962. Still conservative, but still 'in development'. Reagan did not truly come on the national stage until 1964 with his nominating speech for Senator Barry Goldwater, and it was 2 years later that he was elected Governor of California. The rest is history.

Amnesty is amnesty. It promotes more illegal immigration. Even if the Democrats followed through on all their promises the damage would still have been done. As I said, it was a mistake.

Have you actually read the '86 legislation that was signed into law by President Reagan?

And when the time comes and I have to pick a candidate for nomination in 2010, Sarah's McCain mistake alone wouldn't stop my support of her.

How many mistakes will you overlook?

[mkjessup]

That ain’t cheap, Rabs paid good money for those shots.

[Victoria Delsoul]

RINO apologists ping!

I support JD 100% and soon I will be contributing to his campaign, but this name calling of anyone who supports McCain is childish.  I don't agree with Sarah Palin and Scott Brown endorsing and campaigning for him, but that doesn't mean they are RINOs, and it doesn't make me a RINO apologist.

On second thought, maybe you're right.  If Republican In Name Only (RINO) means growing alienated from the GOP because it has lost its way, that is fine.  The GOP needs to go back to its roots and the conservative principles of less government, lower taxes, strength in the war on terror and in our nation's security, and support for free market freedom and ideas.  These are the things Sarah Palin and Scott Brown ran on.  Why would anyone who advocates conservative principles want to embrace the GOP as it stands right now?  So Republican In Name Only (RINO) is fitting, though your RINO calling was meant as an insult.

[FreeReign]

Sarah Palin has energized the conservative base, there is much to like about many of her positions, but until she actually declares her candidacy for elective office, she is just one more political celebrity.

Yup.

While Sarah Palin has many qualities that would certainly endear her to many Reaganites, she is not at all in the same league as Ronald Reagan, not at this point in her political career. The fact is, her experience could be compared to that of Ronald Reagan about 1962. Still conservative, but still 'in development'. Reagan did not truly come on the national stage until 1964 with his nominating speech for Senator Barry Goldwater, and it was 2 years later that he was elected Governor of California. The rest is history.

Reagan ran for the nomination in '68, 4 years after his first major speech and two years after being elected governor. Reagan tried to maintain his responsibilities as governor while he ran for nomination.

Sarah served two years as governor and gave her first major national speech in 2008, four years before a possible presidential run. Sarah has major league experience on the campaign trail and in the VP debate during the 2008 election. Sarah still has a year or two of experience to gain as a public speaker, political analyst, policy wonk and campaigner for other candidates, before her possible run in 2012. Potentially, I would compare Sarah's experience a year or two from now to Reagan's experience in 1968 or even past that.

Have you actually read the '86 legislation that was signed into law by President Reagan?

Yes, it's amnesty.

How many mistakes will you overlook?

I don't overlook mistakes. All positives and all negatives will be considered about all the candidates.

You would do it differently?

[mkjessup]

You need to send your resume’ to Sarah Palin, she could use someone like you on her staff, lol

[FreeReign]

You need to send your resume’ to Sarah Palin, she could use someone like you on her staff, lol

If Obama continues to destroy the field that I'm in... I'll consider it. lol.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

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.

This just makes my case, however. Given what has been said above, exactly which conservative candidate do you expect DeMint to rally behind, since there were none in the race?

Further, we all know that McCain was running for President. He'd been doing so nonstop since he lost the primary in SC to Bush. To pretend otherwise is simply willful ignorance.

Sorry, but the Palin situation is completely different. In the AZ Senate primary, there are two clearly differentiated candidates - McCain the RINO and JD the real conservative. Palin has actively chosen the RINO, even though there's a conservative in the race that she, the supposed Tea Party Goddess, could easily have stood with. By not doing so, she's betraying the movement whose "convention" (which, btw, wasn't a legitimate grassroot Tea Party event, it was a $500-a-plate fundraiser organised by political insiders) she just spoke at.

Face it, Palin made a very stupid choice in supporting McCain over Hayworth.

[Rich Knight]

What list of stances are you contending adds up to 80%?

[Lakeshark]

McCain has some huge problems with his past record. I think his brand of "crossing the aisle" has hurt conservatives and the republican party big time. I think we should pull for an upset by JD at this point.

That being said, it's really dumb of us not to support Mccain in the general if he wins the primary. Getting 60-70% of what we want is far better than rubber stamping the radical left agenda. McCain has been good on some things, as opposed to what all the democrat senators have shown. A new democrat would be a disaster.