Posted on 02/03/2008 4:58:36 AM PST by tomnbeverly
The Insanity that has taken over on this forum, when it comes to the potential GOP nominees, is bordering on Psychotic.
1. John McCain and Mitt Romney are both good and decent men.
2. Either one being the GOP nominee is a far cry better then the Surrender Monkeys on the other side.
I only ask that we do not stray into that Liberal arena of Personal destruction. I have listened to Sean and Rush and I blame them for engaging this tactic in our party.
We should never have to tear one candidates record down to promote the other. For that reason alone Ronald Reagan would be turning over in his grave.
"Straight talker" McCain voted against the tax cuts before he pandered as a presidential candidate to make them permanent.
"Straight talker" McCain was for amnesty for illegals before he pandered as a presidential candidate to deny he ever supported amnesty.
Is that the kind of "straight talker" you want in the Oval Office?
Vote for Hillary. At least she has been consistent with her lies.
At that time there were all kinds of kooky charges being leveled at the future president (that he used cocaine, had impregnated a girlfriend and talked her into an abortion, etc.) just as there are now against John McCain. It infuriated a lot of us--some of us (me) who first choice wasn't Bush--because here and other places on the internet, there is no truth filter and persons can claim anything they want with impunity.
You see it in the previous postings against McCain.
I personally don't have anything against Mitt Romney except his politics, demonstrated by his apparent swaying from one side of the conservative coin to the other as governor of a far-left northeastern state and the fact that I believe McCain to be the stronger candidate. As far as his religion goes, I don't care if he worships the sun instead of the Son (though, IMO, Mormons do believe in a fairy tale as do many fundamentalists who take the Bible literally).
I do believe that he has resorted to some nasty attack ads (as evidenced by none of the major GOP candidates endorsing him after they've suspended their candidacies); but I WOULD certainly vote for him over either of the two Democratic candidates. The thought of Hillary in charge of my country sends cold chills down my back.
Yes you do you parlay to the Democrat if you do not vote for the Republican... and the Democrats are rabid dogs..
Period..
You’re right about the direction of the party since 1988... I’d say the “tipping point” was when George Herbert Walker Bush said that he wanted a “kinder and gentler America” to which Nancy Reagan supposedly said “kinder and gentler than what?”
I’m not sure how the Party rebuilds itself — I don’t think Newt’s approach of having “cumbayah” (sp?) sessions to try and forge important non-partisan policy prescriptions is anything more than a sham. We still have great think-tanks that are developing the right policy prescriptions.
What is missing is the process of getting the conservative message out and circulated — argued for, pressed at the local level, and applied at local, state and federal government levels.
Read the book “The Education of Ronald Reagan” and you will learn that Reagan developed “The Speech” over a 10 year stint working as spokesman for GE — helping to convey the free market, capitalist, strong defense, anti-communist, anti-union message at locales (the “mashed potato circuit”) around the country in proximity to GE plants. “Move the workers in advance of the union organizing elections or negotiations” was the strategy. When Reagan got into politics (governor of CA), he was merely pressing the philosophy he had been advocating for 15 years.
Where are the great conservative governors (Mark Sanford; Sonny Perdue?)? Where are the great conservative state legislators? What are they doing to promote conservative ideas and prove their rightness?
The think-tanks aim their prescriptions at Senators and Congressmen — that’s probably too late. Or the good senators and congressmen should take those ideas back to the states, run as governors to develop their executive experience and then bring it back for a run for the presidency.
It doesn’t get repaired overnight or anytime soon — but it needs to happen.
Since 1988, we haven’t had a conservative standard bearer. The Contract with America was an attempt, and I give Newt the credit for leading it, but he turned out to be a very flawed messenger and would have been a terrible candidate — he should have left Congress in 1996 and gone back to Georgia to become governor and apply the conservative principles and prescriptions at the state level... and he could have left the congressional leadership to a more honest and idealistic heir (not sure whom that would have been — maybe John Kasaic? before he turned moderate TV commentator?).
Just my thoughts during a depressing political season.
i don’t ever want to hear anything about “broken glass” republicans ever again... i’m not big on mccain myself but he’ll do a darn sight better prosecuting the war than shrillary ... no, she won’t withdraw the troops but she’ll just turn them into meals-on-wheels ... my son didn’t join up to serve MREs to people
I am not so sure that 8 years from now elections will even be allowed in our country.
Heck I’m beginning to think for a long time now they’ve been rigged.
I take it “moderate_conservative” is not Rush in drag?
You missed the last seven years of BDS? Everything is Bush fault now and 5 years from now too... don’t you get it?
John McCain is not. Take your vanity and stuff it.
So, yes, it's a 4 person race whether the MSM likes it or not.
You also have the possibility that the now elderly McCain may have a cardiovascular blowout somewhere and find himself "dropping out" of everything, not just the race.
Sometimes a candidate is just too old to run for President, and he got there several years ago.
Why else did you think he's shown such changes in his personality in recent times, or has gotten the reputation for being "Senator McNasty"? Did you think that was just negative propaganda from his enemies? Sometimes folks going around doing bizarre stuff have problems ~ thinking of Britney Spears here ~ and the underlying cause must eventually be attended to before they do something worse than not wearing panties in public ~ kind of like McCain showing us his a$$ by sponsoring his fasccistic "McCain/Feingold" bill and his "McAmnesty" garbage.
Reagan’s bones started spinnning when McCain first declared. Reagan was wise, calm, and stately. McCain is no Reagan
Do not forget that it took Reagan two tries and a Carter win over a RINO to wake the party up in time for 1980. Reagan had short-term practicality with (l)ibertarian-driven long term ideals.
The Bush-McCain battle, touted as a faction battle between base and “moderates” in 2000 was merely an antler crash over who led the establishment wing. Bush is his father’s son.
Conservatism is not defined by “reaching across the isle” to compromise with positions antithetical to our principles.
Note that beyond “...radical Islamist extremism...” and “...footsoldier in the Reagan Revolution” soundbites, all he can say is “I’m proud of XXXXXXX”. Empty suit with questionable judgment.
We are witnessing the end of the GOP, in my opinion. The things Ron Paul says, for the most part, make sense. The gap between short-term reality and long-term ideals is too great for him to deal with. The emotional disdain for the Iraq war limits his ability to articulate the necessity for reasonable movement-oriented change.
The party has left me. If I have to vote for McCain it will be my last Republican vote.
Now that post was inspiring... and is exactly how I feel thank you..
Yes, but they will be the same justices that McCain would chose. What is the difference?
“Lemming.”
You see you have to use personal attacks !
I don’t agree with you about Rush and Sean but either Romney, who I voted for, or McCain, are a LOT better for our country than Mrs. Clinton or Obama for two main reasons:
1)It’s the security of our country we’re talking about. The cut and run, the bloodbath, and the open terrorist base, not to even mention the mental boost it would give them is too bitter to comtemplate.
2)With Mrs. Clinton or Obama you can bet you’ll get Ruth Bader Ginsburg clones for the Supreme Court, a setback of many, many years.
“To some, anything but slavish devotion to their candidate is seen as “tearing down.”
Exactly. Have you ever noticed how the Mitt bots here accuse you of being a hater if you don’t support Flip? Typical cheap liberal tactic used by those who lack debating skills.
Even if they were his running mates can you guarantee he would listen to their counsel? He doesn’t listen to the voters, so why would he take the advice of his vp? He runs roughshod over the base and calls them names when they don’t agree with his policies.....what would he do to his vp?
LOL. You consider yourself a "conservative" - I'll consider you a "surrender monkey".
“Based on their positions... Promote your guy put .. .don’t tear the other one down or use personal attacks..”
Why? I LOATHE McCain on a personal level. I think he’s a lousy person, and the worst candidate we could come up with - and that INCLUDES the raving moonbat Ron Paul.
This isn’t helped by the Annointed One’s “I assume I’ll win the nomination...” attitude. This power-mad old creep has wanted the Presidency for years, and I guess he’s finally going to get the nomination, simply because he’s lived long enough, and is liberal enough to appease the moderate wing of our party, and unelectable enough to win the full-fledged support of the Liberal Media.
Tuesday will show to what degree our party has sunk to RAT-like dimness. If McCain wins the nomination, I won’t vote Republican this year.
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.