Posted on 02/20/2008 1:45:14 PM PST by Robbin
Post 8 above..but was mostly ignored as some here would rather not want to think Reagan would have supported McCain. The Post before was quickly recognized, not the second Micheal Regan column.
There will never be another Reagan, to say otherwise, the candidate would be disingenuous. Would they have differed; but still worked together..yes; as that is the type of Man Ronald Reagan was--a uniter not a divider. A leader but a supporter as well. Reagan scolded Republicans for not backing one another, by saying we will wind up with another Jimmy Carter or even worse should you sit home pouting come election day.
Actually, before his long association with Reagan, and his need to play conservative to later run for the nomination himself, Bush was considered at least as moderate as McCain, maybe more so.
And Schweiker, whom Reagan tagged as his running mate in 1976, was considered not a moderate but a liberal ... made McCain look like James Dobson.
Just sayin' ....
I am clueless on that statement. With all due respect, perhaps you could explain:
I think we are all freedom loving Americans. I am not a McCain fan, but I am definitely not going over to the Dark Side. I am however, supporting one on the Dark Side while that person runs against the other, to help choose who McCain might run against. Means endless Party e-mails now, but a delete button is within a nano-second away.
Good story for discussion.
“People keep saying Reagan would have supported McCain, based on this quote, I don’t think so...”
I don’t know if Reagan would’ve supported McCain or not, but I’m sure he would’ve backed our troops while in combat and would understand that cutting off our noses to spite our faces (i.e. like those conservatives who want to knowingly and willingly hand the supreme court over to the liberals for another 30-years) only perpetuates the abortion holocaust.
Dadgum, Owl ... you're making too much sense there. You're not from around here, are you? :-)
In all seriousness, the Court ... and the fact that there will likely be two or three retirements in the next four years ... is the fly in the ointment of the "let's-go-to-the-wilderness-and-come-back-purified-and-stronger-in-four-years" theory.
We may be purified and stronger and all, but the Court will be in the hands of ACLU lawyers for the next 20 years.
I heard about that...Shhh!! You don't want to spoil anyone's hero-worship.
Not true, after Reagan did Amensty he was man enough to say he had made a mistake.
People should have thought about supporting a candidate that all could support if they were concerned about the SC.
Besides, Obama is going to trounce our 72 year old white guy who has been in the senate his entire Post vietnam life.
“We may be purified and stronger and all, but the Court will be in the hands of ACLU lawyers for the next 20 years.”
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t particularly like McCain any more than a lot of FReepers. I supported almost every other Republican candidate over McCain, but we know how that turned out.
For me, I will hold my nose and vote for the troops and babies because I have seen in my life that the court holds the trump card. We could come back in 4 years like people say with a good president and Republican-controlled Congress (I can dream) and still have our agenda blocked because we didn’t think about judges this election.
Ronald Reagan Would Back McCain -
by Michael Reagan
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1970504/posts
President Reagan supported GHW Bush, he would undoubtedly support McCain as well.
“People should have thought about supporting a candidate that all could support if they were concerned about the SC.”
Democracy is strange that way. Sometimes the person getting the most votes wins, sometimes not. What’s interesting to me is that you appear to assume that the candidate that you are for (whoever that is) is someone “...that all could support.” I think you mean, “...that I could support.” Maybe you should have been more active on behalf of the candidate you supported instead of blaming everybody else for not putting YOUR candidate over the top.
“Besides, Obama is going to trounce our 72 year old white guy who has been in the senate his entire Post vietnam life.”
I think you’re right, but, like sports, you still show up for the game even though that other team is favored. Your way, the loss is guaranteed because you don’t even show up - you forfeit - not only the next 4-years, but on abortion and the war on terror with years, if not decades, of implications on both issues. I may feel personally let down by the republicans, but I’m going to support our troops and living babies even if I have to go down swinging. That’s what I think Reagan would do.
No he wouldn't not the second time around after it failed the first time. He reluctantly went along with it after Congress promised to close the doors with employer sanctions and beefed up border patrol which they reneged on, never closed loopholes and never funded. And there was massive fraud in the applications, something like 30 to 40%.They left Reagan holding the bag on that one. Guess who was instrumental back then too, Ted Kennedy.
Now, having been told from the start that people will not support McCain. It was pretty stupid to do it and then expect everyone to fall in line.
I did support Fred, with more money than I’ve ever put into all past elections combined. I also supported Hunter.
But I will never vote for McCain...
Reagan campaigned extensively for Ford in the west in 1976, at Ford’s request. Ford then won everything west of Texas.
- yeah, I’ve noticed that tact. It’s getting pretty old.
>”...so I thought I would start this thread so I could get caught up.”<
-Ha! A glutton for punishment, eh? ;^)
Love the pictures Bender.
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.