Posted on 01/21/2008 5:48:14 AM PST by cotton1706
Bull. The vote came 5 months into Bush's term. And McCain was one of two Republicans to vote against them.
It wasn't a principled anything. It was a personal vendetta by a scorned man who thought he'd won the nomination after Michigan in 2000. The same vendetta that led him into the arm of the Democrats, where he remains today. That's why he's every Democrat's favorite Republican.
Thompson supported McCain-Feingold. So much for the lawsuits. And Thompson is a close friend of McCain who will likely endorse him. Is he “insidious?” Is Coburn? Thune? Please.
You nitpick the edges of issues. Yes, McCain is not a pure conservative he’s a 2/3rds conservative. Which is why he can win and this is the cycle if there ever was one to vote electability.
The really funnt part is using ROMNEY to make the conservative case. Since you call me a closet liberal I’ll call you a mormon identity voter. I’m TDY in Utah and surprise, surprise all my friends here are for Romney. I wonder why.
hahaha. Make the conservative case with the guy who was more pro-gay rights than Ted Kennedy. The guy who attacked the boy scouts. The guy who is pro-choice because of a botched illegal abortion. The guy who was an INDEPENDENT during the time of Reagan/Bush and didn’t vote for them while McCain was on the spearhead of the Reagan movement. The guy who hires illegal immigrants. The guy who was more pro-gay rights than Kennedy.
And you have the balls to tell me my supporting McCain makes me a liberal. Hahaha, that you’re so gullible to fall for this TRUE liberal is the real issue here.
Well said.
Hasbeen politicians are endorsing the good conservative John McCain they remember from decades ago, not the addled RINO that he has become today.
It’s time to get optiMITTstic, George! Leave the gloom and doom to the Dims.
Blackburn ... very interesting choice!
I’d nail down southern voters with Barbour or Snaford of DeMint or Frist too ...
but it never hurts to defeat that MSM meme of “two white guys against the ticket of the future”
Great! Thanks Fawn
PING for Truth.
:-) Oh Yeah! Another post just said Carl Cameron was reporting and didn’t even mention Mitt just Giuliani and McCain. I love how Mitt just keep pressing forward even though at times it is just a blackout for him from the MSM. He doesn’t let it get in the way and this will be what serves him best as a President as well. Vision, goals, follow through . . . lead . . . outstanding results. I can’t wait :-).
Go Mitt! All you naysayers can stay on the sidelines, twiddling your thumbs, attacking a good man... If not Mitt, who? McCain? Huck? Rudy? FDT is done. Either put up or shut up.
If Obama is the Democrat nominee and the Republicans nominate someone who is offensive to the evangelicals, I could see Obama taking some southern states. A huge African-American turnover combined with a depressed evangelical turnout could cause a southern red state or two to flip.
Dems were hoping Reagan would get nominated in 1980 too.
what do they know.
I don’t want a candidate who will say anything to get elected, or wear anything to get elected.
I want a candidate who can articulate the common sense of conservatism in the context of our history and the Constitution. Liberalism can’t possibly stand up against those basic principals.
Primary elections aren’t beauty pageants or horse races. They are an opportunity to identify which candidate most closely identifies with the ideals that make us conservatives.
In my view, Fred Thompson is the only candidate who possesses those qualities.
I could care less about doing what might be best for slick, poseable Ken doll candidates or born again Conservatives or ballistic Mavericks. I especially could care less about which “GOP flavor of the day” is being promoted by the media. Screw them….I want what’s best for our COUNTRY. Once that candidate has been chosen, I’ll focus on preventing Bill Clinton from becoming our First Lady…
“I don’t believe in amnesty,” Romney said, using a word voiced by Republicans to describe widespread forgiveness of illegal residency in the United States.
But at the same time, Romney said illegal immigrants should have a chance to obtain citizenship.
http://www.alipac.us/article-print-1737.html
I think you are the one in the tin foil crowd. mcCain is not the target of the Dems despite his strong pro-war stance. Here is what Edwards said yesterday,
"Well, he is starting to look like the Republican nominee,” Edwards said in response to a reporter’s question about McCain, “and I think it's important for us to have somebody to run against McCain who can beat him. And national polls show that I'm the one who beats John McCain in the general election. And second, I think even more important than that, this is a guy who's made central to his political life campaign finance reform. It seems to me we ought to be putting somebody up against him who's never taken money from special interest PACs or Washington lobbyists. Between the three of us, that's me."
I never said the polls were faked, just that they are not relevant until we have the actual two nominees from the parties. Most of the public is not even paying attention to the Presidential race. Their opinions are based primarily on name recognition and not much more. Bill Clinton trailed Bush 41 in the polls early on. He was a little known governor from a small state.
McCain is the most electable by far. History dictates this. Common political sense, regular common sense. Anecdotally, I talk a lot of politics when I’m in my squadron. The mere mention of Romneys name gets eyes rolling. And these are not liberal people. These are people who overwhelmingly voted for Bush. He’s a fake and everyone knows it.
McCain is part of the Washington establishment. He has been feeding at the public trough since 1983. He has never been in private business or had an executive job in the gobvernment. Historically, we have only elected one sitting senator to be President in the 20th and now 21st centuries, i.e., JFK. Governors and VPs seem to be the training ground for future Presidents.
Do the eyes in your squadron roll when you talk about immigration and amnesty. Do your mates relaize that if amnesty is granted to the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens, i.e., legalized status, they will be able to sponsor more than 65 million LEGAL immigrants thru chain migration? The 1986 amnesty projected one million would apply for amnesty, but the actual number turned out to be 2.7 million. The 65 million number is based on 12 million illegal aliens, so it could be much higher if it is closer to 20 million.
McCain is supposed to be the national security candidate yet, McCain-Kennedy was a risk to national security. A massive blanket amnesty also creates a national security problem by providing new opportunities and advantages for alien terrorists currently operating on American soil. Inexplicably, supporters of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill assume that its enactment will allow the federal government to identify these terrorists. On the contrary, the bill will make it easier for alien terrorists to operate in the United States by allowing them to create fraudulent identities with ease. The terrorists will have options: (1) continue to operate as an illegal alien; (2) obtain the amnesty using one’s own name; or (3) invent a clean identity with the help of the U.S. Government. With this newly minted identity backed up by an ID card, the alien terrorist will be armed with the perfect “breeder document,” allowing him to obtain driver’s licenses and just about any other form of identification that he desires. This is essentially what the nineteen 9/11 hijackers did: They used their passports and visas as “breeder documents” to obtain 63 driver’s licenses. The documents allowed them to travel openly and board airplanes easily. In fact, four of the hijackers were even registered to vote.
McCain still says that McCain-Kennedy was not amnesty nor was the 2006 bill. This is a lie. It is amnesty. McCain is the fake and liar.
If we don’t mix it up this year we lose. If we don’t appeal to independents and conservative Dems we lose. If we chose a weasel like Romney over a genuine hero like McCain we deserve to lose. At least I would feel better about it. The party that made such a moronic choice would deserve to be the party that ushers in the era of Socialism Hillary/Obama will bring. If we nominate McCain and lose it would hurt more, at least I can be spared that. Like 1996 it would suck to see the better honorable man lose to a skunk.
If McCain is the nominee, we deserve to lose. He doesn't represent where most of the Rep base is. How can any party nominate someone who is against his own party, i.e,, a maverick. Will you vote for Romney if he is the nominee of the party?
Which ones?
The nightmare is folks like you tryong to tarnish a good man in Romney... McCain HATES conservatives, and the GOP. He may very well select that scum Lieberman as VP...He’s a disaster. Mitt is eons better, and would be a much better candidate
“You’re right. A vote for McCain is a way to avoid amnesty legislation.”
IS that sarcasm or stupidity?
A vote for McCain is a vote for the MSM to declare opposition to amnesty ‘over’ and meaningless and to shove it down our throats in 2009. Signed by President Hillary or McCain, either one.
A vote for Romney will someday lead people to say “You know, McCain might have become president if only he didn’t support that immigration bill.”
Politicians are like mules. A good whipping is sometimes required to keep them in line.
Yep. We have this old coot saying he is the candidate of change and against the Washington establishment, which he is part of along with Hillary and Obama. Why elect McCain when you can get the real thing [liberal] with either Obama or Hillary?
Who are you FOR in the primary?
I implore you... read this Human Events story on how Romney's health care plan was proposed, what EXACTLY IT IS, and how it ended up with what it did.
ESPECIALLY the part on personal responsiblity, and the waiver Romney had put in the bill until the LEGISLATURE took it out... and with 85% Democratic legislature, well....
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=13974
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.