The mighty Rudy has struckout.
Posted on 02/02/2008 1:29:05 PM PST by moderate_conservative
Steven Calabresi, Professor of Law at Northwestern University (http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/Calabresi/Calabresi.html) and co-founder of the premiere conservative legal organization, The Federalist Society, who previously backed Rudy has now endorsed John McCain. In an e-mail to me he explained:
I have endorsed Senator McCain and think he would be an excellent president because he is tough on foreign policy, committed to spending restraint which is the key to small government, and because he has consistently voted for good judicial nominees in tough fights like Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. I am not troubled by his role as a member of the gang of 14 because I think the compromise he forged got us cloture on Roberts and Alito and produced three excellent lower court judges: Bill Pryor, Janice Rogers Brown, and Priscilla Owen.
Conservative legal scholar and former Solicitor General Charles Fried, another ex-Rudy supporter, also informed me that he “immediately, readily and enthusiastically switched to McCain” after Rudy dropped out.
Agreed. I wonder what this retread’s original FReeper name was before he shuffled off to WA.
“Mitt Romney has been pro-choice on abortion.” ~ moderate_conservative
Hee hee hee. Want to see what some of the leftist Mass voters who voted for him have to say about that? Here ya go:
NY Times thecaucusblog/Comments section [Mass. voters talking about Romney on May 11, 2007]:
“.. he stated that he supported gay rights, but then attempted to have a Constitutional ammendment added to the ballot to have gay marriage banned in the state. ..”
“I firmly believe that he’ll ‘change his mind’ and go agree with his base if he’s elected just like he did on the abortion right’s issue. ..”
“.I will never forget when he vetoed the stem cell legilation after the bills’ sponsors had worked so hard at generating bi-partisan support. And he vetoed the bill ...”
“...If you want to know what Mitt is really about, please try to find his speeches to the Federalist Society to see what he’s really made of. ..”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com
Thank you, my sweet friend...
Once it’s Obama or Hillary against McCain in the general election, conservative positions will soften on McCain. Right now it’s tantrum time on the Free Republic.
If you don't rember who co-authored last summer's "Comprehensive Immigration Reform," bill, it was Senator McCain, don't believe what he says, he has not changed his mind about immigration reform. Take it from someone who has lived through the free for all on the border since the last immigration reform bill, what he proposes will bring about more of the same. When those of us who live the nightmare on the border try to explain the situation here to Senator McCain, he blows up, tells us we don't know what we are talking about.
In 1992 people in Arkansas who knew the Clintons, tried to warn the rest of the country about the Clintons, no one listened, we all know what followed. Now those of us in Arizona, who know John McCain are trying to warn the rest of the country.
Please listen, let's not make another mistake.
Past tense.
The quote is actually in the present perfect tense.
Anyone who votes or supports McCain is the same.
Anyone who votes or supports Mccain is an idiot because he supports Marxism/Socialism which will destroy the U.S. , prosperity and liberty like it did in the Soviet Union by destroying the golden goose , capitalism.
Anyone who votes for or supports McCain is also a traitor.
Anyone who votes for or supports Mccain is an idiot because he supports Marxism/Socialism which will destroy the U.S. , prosperity and liberty like it did in the Soviet Union by destroying the golden goose , capitalism.
I understand and respect your opinion, but I see McCain as the best alternative to Clintons and Obamas.
SEMI-PRESIDENTIAL ENDORSEMENT
And the Winner is ...
By John Semmens
Feb. 2, 2008
Normally, I wouldn’t think of endorsing a presidential candidate. After all, who would care what I think? But faced with the stampede of celebrity endorsements for various candidates, I figured I know at least as much about politics as these luminaries. Why shouldn’t I endorse someone?
Of course, the decision to announce an endorsement is freighted with responsibility. How is one to choose? At this stage of the game, the options have narrowed. Many worthy candidates have already dropped out. Former senator John Edwards’ (D-N.C.) plan to sue America into prosperity offered the promise of riches to every undeserving sloth in the country. Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) was the only candidate alert to the threat of extraterrestrial invasion. Former senator Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) had some good ideas, but had a hard time fitting the campaign into his schedule. For my endorsement to carry any weight, I realize I must select from those still in the running.
Among the Democrats still in the running, we have Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Senator Hillary Clinton (N.Y.). Now, Senator Obama has several attractive qualities. He is half black and half white, half Muslim and half Christian, half American and half foreign and has many half-baked ideas. Obama has been endorsed by wrestler Hulk Hogan and famed swimmer Ted Kennedy.
Sen. Clinton has a wealth of experience aiding and abetting many of former president Bill Clinton’s activities over the years and has yet to go to jail. This demonstrates a dexterity that is the envy of many professional politicians. She has been endorsed by “People Who Need People” singer, Barbra Streisand.
Among the Republicans we have Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), former governor Mitt Romney (Mass.), former governor Mike Huckabee (Ark.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Texas). Sen. McCain has been widely hailed as a “maverick.” A maverick is an unbranded cow. This is important because a branded cow is not a maverick. The media have gone to great efforts over the years to emphasize this. McCain has been endorsed by baseball player Curt Schilling.
Gov. Romney probably has the most breadth of any of the Republicans, having at one time or another been on every side of all the important issues. Such flexibility could come in handy in an uncertain future or when the political winds change direction. Romney has been endorsed by Donny and Marie Osmond, who I have heard may be dance contestants on some reality TV show.
Gov. Huckabee is from Arkansas, a state that gave America one of its only two impeached presidents. Whether Huckabee could follow in the footsteps of that other Arkansan president is unknown, but like that other president, he has wowed crowds by playing a musical instrument on the campaign trail. Huckabee has been endorsed by movie tough guy Chuck Norris, who could probably beat up all the other celebrity endorsers, with the possible exception of Hulk Hogan.
Rep. Paul appears to take the U.S. Constitution seriously. This is generally regarded as a critical blunder by most political experts and may have severely hampered his campaign. Dr. Paul is also a gynecologist. This gives him a perspective on women’s tissues that is unduplicated by any of the other candidates. Paul has been endorsed by Alice’s Restaurant customer Arlo Guthrie.
Given these choices, I’ll have to throw my support to Ron Paul.
We are going to see the name of whoever becomes president in print and hear it over the airwaves for the next four years. Of all the candidates, Ron Paul’s name is the shortest. In print it will use less ink. Using less ink means lower costs and less impact on the environment. On broadcast news, it won’t take as long to say his name. This will save precious time, allowing broadcasts to end earlier or move on to more interesting topics.
In sum, it seems clear that electing Ron Paul president will have less negative impact on the economy and the environment than electing any of the others. In my opinion, this is a very tangible reason why Ron Paul ought to be our next president.
http://www.azconservative.org/
No comment.
That’s funny.
With regard to Romney, it’s past tense. He’s clearly pro-choice now.
Suuuuuuure, he is pro-life NOW!
“So somebody who holds 95% of the views that you believe define conservatism, but disagrees on the other 5%, is simply not a conservative?”
That 5% is McCain-Feingold (freedom of speech) and McCain-Kennedy on immigration (this country’s sovereignty, and a big crack in national security) pretty important 5%.
McCain also seems clueless on economic issues. HIS finances are all taken care of, but doesn’t know how that happens. Global warming? Please. He is a very lazy politician, like so many of his beltway colleagues.
As far as the Federalist founder ... Uhmm “law professor .... university.” Says it all. So much for endorsements these days. I wonder what McCain cabinet post he’s in line for.
“Moderate” conservative?
Is that a bad thing?
Joining FR now to campaign for your liberal guy is indicative that you think Conservatives on this forum should move left toward MeCainism and abandon the core principles that they believe makes this the greatest country on the planet.
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.