Wow. Attacking a guy while running against him, then making nice when he wins the nomination??? Who ever heard of such a thing!
Fred Thompson though so.
Romney’s endorsing McCain is better for the GOP (and hence the country) than Romney’s not endorsing McCain.
It’s a perfect match. One flip flopper endorsing another.
I still don't think I can vote for McCain, but I'm reasonably sure he wouldn't be quite the disaster as Obama-Clinton.
Who did you want Romney to endorse? Hillary or Obama?
Well McCain called him a flip flopper but Huckabee attacked Romney for his religion.
And McCain’s stated positions are similar to Romney’s stated positions.
All in all not a surprise.
OK who’s the other candidate with the respect of all conservatives, the money to advertise a national campaign and fire in the belly to win the GOP nomination in place of McCain? Face it the time has past to take it away from McCain, and you haven’t a clue who could do it.
No, it's never ok. That said, CFR can be changed.
I will vote for McCain for one simple reason. He will put our military and the security of our country first.
I will never vote for Hillary or Obama as CiC over our military. Never. The Clinton's loathe the military and I have no idea what BHO will do about anything if he is elected but I know it won't be good for our country.
I was proud of Romney for admitting defeat with the promise of working to get a Republican elected as president.He could have gone home and pouted,he showed class and I admire him for that.
It’s called politics...It’s been around over a couple of hundred years...get use to it.
There is just so much up with which I am willing to put. :{)
I guess that phony conservatives will support the candidate that is best for the country. While true conservatives will settle for nothing less than a total conservative defeat. (that way we have a lot more to complain about.)
I dunno, ask all the freepers who hailed Fred Thompson as the second coming of Ronald Reagan and the saivor of the GOP. As near as I can tell, it works like this for them:
Pre-Fred Thompson candidacy: Actively working to enact McCain-Feingold is a deal-breaker for me and ANY candidate who supported that legislation will NEVER get my vote and has no buisness running for President.
During Fred Thompson candidacy: Fred was instrumental in passing McCain-Feingold and to this day refuses to promise to repeal it? Oh well, nobody's perfect. Fred had very good motives, he was just trying to get rid of all the corruption in politics at the time. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Post-Fred Thompson candidacy: Actively working to enact McCain-Feingold is a deal-breaker for me and ANY candidate who supported that legislation will NEVER get my vote and has no buisness running for President.
Did YOU vote for President Bush in 2000? If so, did you vote for him in 2004?
President Bush signed McCain-Feingold Bill.
And you signed up two days ago to post a vanity. Go away.
Just as I figured. A two-day-old newbie posts an inane vanity and then gives no response to comments. That is the classic behavior of a TROLL!
Since a vast majority of people here at FR were endorsing the guy who did more than anybody in the Senate to pass McCain/Feingold (Fred Thompson), it’s hardly a big deal that a person who ran on the platform to repeal McCain/Feingold still thinks we should all back McCain now that he is our nominee.
We lost the McCain/Feingold argument when we conservatives decided to put it aside just because “our man” was for it.
If you look at the attacks on McCain from after we started supporting Thompson, you’ll see a decided shift away from attacking McCain/Feingold, and onto other issues we disagreed with.
Romney supporters recognize the class in the guy. No amount of spindoctoring can change the fact that Mitt is a man of moral character, business savvy and who puts his loyalty to his country and party ahead of his own personal desire.