This crap is getting tiring. I hope it goes away over after the nominee is chosen. Yes, McCain is annoying (personally, at this point I’d rather see Romney, but neither of these two are all that great), but this garbage about “you are either a conservative or you are not”, and “he’s no better than Hillary” is ridiculous. I haven’t seen Hillary staunchly supporting the WOT and Iraq war. I haven’t seen McCain pandering to NOW and the pro-abortion lobby. And bet your bottom dollar that Hillary will appoint a few more Ginsburgs to the USSC.
Fine, keep bitching now (that’s what primaries are for), but have some sense in the general election campaign.
As for Rush Limbaugh, he makes the best case that can be made for opposing McCain in the general, but frankly its not very good. By suggesting that somehow Hillary “will be no worse” than McCain, and that “we may need a Hillary” to bring back conservatism, he’s really minimizing the importance of conservatism. Connservatism is important enough to me that I will always pick the MOST conservative candidate available, even if it is McCain in the general election. Conservatism is important enough to me that I do not want 4 or 8 years of a flaming liberal Hillary. Is Rush suggesting that the next 4 or 8 years are not important? Hell, they are to me.
Actualy, Rush, like me is suggesting that the only thing that will bring Conservatives back together is for someone like Hillary to be in office for very long.
I’ve said it a couple of times, to unite Conservatives will take a Hillary (or even Obama) in office.
I say this because right now the media has pushed out the most Conservative of the candidates, by pushing polls down everyone’s throats, and what’s worse, people who are intelligent and KNOW BETTER have been getting in these very forums and whining about “the most electable” instead of actually standing up, supporting and HELPING people like Hunter and Thompson.
It’s too bad we’re going to see at least four years of a Democrat in office next... because of some of those whiny babies who tried to do the “pragmatic” rather than stand on principles.
The principles of Conservatism aren’t constantly moving to the left. All of the candidates, except Thompson and Hunter are moving to the left.
The MSM is a living, breathing force that is pulling/skewing everything to the left. McCain will be touted as a conservative by the MSM. In reality, McCain is probably leaning a little on the liberal side of the Liberal/Conservative meter.
On a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being ultra left and 100 being ultra conservative, here are where the candidates actually rate:
Clinton = 5
Obama = 8
Edwards = 10
McCain = 40
Giulinai = 40
Romney = 45
Huckabee = 45
Thompson = 75
Hunter = 85
I was shocked to hear Rush give this explanation a couple of days before.
I have listened to Rush for years and years, and he has ALWAYS said (rightly so, IMO), that “you NEVER WIN BY LOSING.”
But that’s exactly what he’s arguing for now. What a flip flop.
His argument that, at least with a Rat president, the Republicans in Congress could be “full-throated” in their opposition was okay; it was better than nothing. But, please, the answer to that is to change the culture of temerity in opposing the President when he’s wrong.
Yes, we do want some party order and decorum. But if the President is not doing what WE want-—for example, in a Supreme Court nomination (Meyers)-—then WE have to raise hell and OUR REPS have to raise hell. Even if they do so behind closed doors, blah blah blah. They have to stand up to the President even if he is from our party. What’s up with that?
Rush was right: you never win by losing. If the Republican president is wrong, the Republicans need to do whatever it takes to get him on the right path, including opposing him when necessary. But no way does the country come out ahead with a Rat president.
For one thing: just compare who ANY Rat will make Secretary of Defense compared to who ANY Republican will. Any questions?