Posted on 02/09/2008 10:32:20 AM PST by TenYearLurker
There's an old Groucho Marx riff in which he launches a new career as a stick-up artist -- while worrying that his native cowardice may not induce the requisite fear among his victims. Sure enough, after a little time in a dark alley he springs out to confront his first victim, points his gun to his own head and says, "Take one step closer and I'll kill myself."
Such is the posture today among pundits on the far right of the Republican Party as Sen. John McCain moves closer to receiving his party's nomination. Consider the destructive implications of their pledge to work against Mr. McCain's nomination and even -- in the event he is nominated -- not to vote in the general election. Start with where it would leave our country -- presumably under the leadership of either Democrat candidate -- in the two domains where we will face critical challenges in the years ahead: our national security and the threat of an economic meltdown.
>snip
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“I just don’t understand what he could do to prove himself without holding office and then meeting expectations to most everyone’s satisfaction.”
He need to apologize for illegal-immigration amnesty, and then take the Jeff Sessions pledge. If he admitted he was wrong on global warming, that would help too. Then he could beg Fred Thompson to be his running mate, and say something like “Fred will be my closest and most trusted advisor when I am President”. Those things might help.
Conservatives should get busy and work hard to elect Conservatives to everything from your local mayor to the Senate. Our only hope now is we can practice some damage control. For that we need to control seats in Congress, Governorships and State Legislatures.
Certainly Reagan wouldn’t have described conservatives as being far right, but no matter. Better far right than squishy center or moderately limp. The correct term for McCain is Democrat. He is a Democrat, not a liberal Republican, not even a RINO, just a Democrat. He is the Republican’s Democrat, the Democrat we have chosen to make the Republican Party an extension of the DNC. McCain may be the most conservative of the Democrats running right now, but that would change if he were to become the nation’s Democrat in the White House. He would push global warming legislation, more restrictions on free, political speech, amnesty, open borders and Hillary care. He will continue to block domestic oil exploration, while supporting every radical, environmental effort to sabotage our energy infrastructure. All you true blue McCain supporters know this is right. Even Wall Street McCain pimps, rich on subsidized labor, would come to see the foolishness of McCain and his policies, but they won’t have a chance. McCain is going to lose because the Republican Party shouldn’t be running Democrats.
What, exactly, are you talking about?
Unless you have something convincing in that suitcase, all I know about McCain gets summarized like this anti-war commentary:
5. Send in more troops. This is the "McCain Option": somehow scare up tens of thousands of new U.S. troops, presumably without a draft, and fling 'em into the fire, then, as Cox notes, "take the cities street by street and hold them through a massive security and intelligence clamp-down." But he also notes the further undeniable truth: "It is of course politically inconceivable, on either side of the Atlantic." However, this is the only serious option that would not very likely lead to full-blown civil war – mostly because it would unite many of the Iraqi factions now at odds into the mother of all insurgencies against the intensified occupation. -- No Exit: The Baker Commission and the Trap of Reality.
Sir, Mr. McCain has been in the Senate for years. He has had a chance to prove himself time and time again.
And what did he do? Actions speak louder than words.
Though it’s your first post, your screen name suggests you’ve been around long enough to know that some posters can’t or won’t differentiate between the author of an article and the person who posted it, preferring to beat up the messenger. I hope the responses don’t dissuade you from further posts.
“HOW DO THEY THINK INSULTING US WILL WIN US?”
They don’t care? They know that almost anyone we elect that has a conservative bone in his body can be subverted by money or power.
My my
who's doing the "screaming"?
Not to mention inaccurate assumptions. McC is about the LAST one I wanted to see left standing.
But that's the deal.
But I'll take him over hitlery or "O" - I have family in the worst part of the WOT - I don't want to see them abandoned, and I especially don't want to have a part in abandoning them by aiding in the election of either hitlery or "O"
You call us "obnoxious arrogant pricks "
and say it's time for US to grow up?
I don’t give a rip who thinks I’m wrong about McCain. The only person who matters what I think is ME! I just do NOT like or TRUST McCain. Nothing can change what I have seen over the past 20 plus years of this man!
Reads like a good, true and gradeable test to me. Thanks.
Grow up.
I thought he pretty much already did that with his "I got the message / secure the borders first."
Then he could beg Fred Thompson to be his running mate, and say something like “Fred will be my closest and most trusted advisor when I am President”
Fred was my pick. So, it wouldn't disappoint me one little bit should McCain choose Thompson.
But, I do expect . . . without any real reason for expecting it . . . for McCain to choose someone with solidly respectable conservative credentials.
Thanks.
main-iac-McCain-iac...Hmmm
You guys tell us that Hunter wasn’t electable and now you are begging us to vote for your ‘un-electable liberal??? HaHa...
Knock off the profanity and personal attacks.
You asked “what kind of showing is required . . . “
I offered three types of showings, and I would have replied that he has received greater than a 50% ranking from the American Conservative Union:
http://www.acuratings.org/2006all.htm#AZ
so that he has satisfied the preponderance test, or the lowest threshold, so that it is more likely than not that he will be conservative.
Fortunately for me, many moons ago I passed on marrying a pretty girl who seemed to me to be more likely than not to honor her wedding vows. Last I heard she was on her third husband.
I suggest: Push for action on the border fence law already passed by Congress. When I see posts in the ground and wire on the posts I will revisit his candidacy.
There must be an official template secretly circulating amongsts RINOs these days, entitled: "Official Template for Articles About Why Conservatives Should Support John McCain." One suspects a fellow might well be excommunicated from the league of RINO writers unless:
(1) He begins or ends the article with an ironic or breezy anecdote that will surely force the conservatives to realize how very silly, stupid, puerile and/or prone to meaningless outbursts of temper conservatives actually are from the sheer cleverness of the anecdote;
(2) He says, at least once how very awful the democrats are;
(3) He transparently misrepresent McCain's record; and
(4) Above all, he must not concede for a moment that there is any merit whatsoever to conservative's reservations about McCain. Make sure to leave the impression that, from your lofty post, you can see conservatives are acting only out of spite and childishness.
But if our support is meaningless, if Johhny boy has put together a magical coalition of tax-raisin', no-torturin', global warmin' fightn', free-speech police who are ready to support him, why all the articles? Just go win the election for your boy without us.
If, on the other hand, ouc support is meaningful, one can only conclude that the columnists, like their hero, deeply dislike conservatives and cannot bring themselves to behave in other than a supercilious and rude manner toward them, no matter how much they need our help.
My severe reservations about McCain have been, 'til now, based on a pretty careful analysis that ends up at the conclusion America lurches further to the left under McCain than under HRC or Obama. Not because he is more left than they, but because of the dynamics that will inevitably arise between McCain and the next congress.
However, if I keep reading the same stupid, condescending article over and over between now and the election, I am might well add spite, childishness, and malice to my list of reasons.
I have to ask myself these questions: What is the most imminent threat to the United States today? Who among the candidates for the Presidency, is most likely to address it effectively? Is McCain a child-molester or serial murderer?
Years ago I was thrilled that a W.W.II-type "Howlin' Mad" leader would become president. The right one is IMO exactly what we need.
McCain looked to be it.
Now I don't know, after the past five or six years. I still wonder why he "reaches across the aisle," with his back to conservatives, to embrace those whom I believe, at least, kept him in prison years longer because of their support for the North Vietnamese Communists.
I can be understanding of his "McNasty" youth (especially since I was not there).
I don't know how to explain this "no borders!" position. Is he beholden to the taxpayer-subsidized (socialize the cost, privatize the profits) "cheap labor" crowd? Or is it rooted in his contumacy? To wit, does he stand firm for -- yes! -- amnesty because of profits or inherent pigheadedness?
"Going over the cliff, flags flying, is still going over the cliff."
Flooding the country with millions of taxpayer-subsidized (socialize the cost, privatize the profits) "cheap" labor, legal or not, is still exposing the country to the "nihilistic crusade being waged by radical Islam."
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.