Posted on 02/22/2008 5:48:40 AM PST by Kaslin
What, are you drunk?
Isn’t McCain one who prefers the praise of his opponents over the cooperation with his own party?
So to me that means that anything he says is subject to disbelief.
Do you implicitly trust him?
I don’t. A lot of other freepers don’t. Conservatives can’t.
“When driving a car with a tendency to veer left, is it better to fix the car, or to redefine “road” in such a way that the road is always under the car? The GOP is asking us to redefine the road.”
GOP is not asking anything, except they would like your voting support for their candidates. GOP primary voters picked Mccain.
“The GOP establishment wants conservatives to back McCain. The problem is that the GOP has forgotten that conservatism is rooted in principle. “
McCain has not forgotten conservative principles, since he evoked them in his CPAC speech.
“And that’s what I see happening — Those who keep calling McCain a conservative are trying to redefine “conservative” to include someone who truly doesn’t fit the definition.”
Why dont you look at McCains CPAC speech and tell us where he redefining conservative inapprropriately. To his credit, McCain is not describing his deviations from conservative orthodoxy as conservative, but he is claiming to be steeped in conservative values due to his positions on spending etc. which are in line with that ...
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/02/019744.php
“Attention GOP: Instead of conservatives joining McCain, McCain needs to join conservatism. Yes, conservatives will ultimately choose McCain over the Democrat nominee — but I’d rather elect McCain because he promotes conservative values, not because he’s “better than the alternative.””
I certainly agree with that sentiment. Candidates reach out to voters not the other way around. The CPAC speech was a start, and his comments on ‘no new entitlement spending, no new taxes, end AMT,’ etc are encouraging. If he could get more real on immigration that would go a loong way too, although his ‘secure the border first’ was a step forward.
“There is only so much conservatives can do to “reach out” without abandoning their principles.”
How much abandonment of conservative principles are implied by letting the most liberal Senator in the US Senate become our President. What conservative principle are you citing when you imply that outcome of an Obama victory should be dismissed as not a concern?
What congressional district are you in? Conservatives need to support conservative Republicans in the many many races that we see a conservative v liberal running.
Hold our nose and vote mccain but put our real effort in helping downballot conservatives win. That’s the right ticket.
.. and whatever we do. do not let america elect obama. it would be a disaster.
Obama will not cause a backlash. obama will remake America the same way Chavez and Castro remade theirs.
......What, are you drunk?....
In vino....veritas
The rest will find that out in the aftermath of the bloodbath of 08.
You'd think the catastrophic drop in *donations* would've tipped them off by now.
Are you saying that the War on Terror is insignificant to you?
Are you Saying that OBama and Hillary are as fiscally conservative as McCain?
Are these insignificant differences to you?
You are walking that fine line between advocate to shill.
Real republicans actually vote republican. And real conservatives with any semblance of a sense of duty toward the country, do not hand it over to socialist tax raising defeatist pacifists at the onset of a recession and in the middle of a war.
You can spin all you like, but you aren't a conservative or a patriot, just a spoiled brat throwing a hissy fit.
Call me whatever you want if you wish. It means nothing to me. Enjoy.
READ MY LIPS. NO_NEW_RINOS
The Christian Right had no other dog in the hunt. Would you have them vote for one of the radical liberal pro-choice, pro-homosexual candidates (Giuliani, Romney), or one of the moderates that took away their voice with CFR (Thompson, McCain)?
Would that they had coalesced around Hunter or Tancredo... But then, the same could be said of the rest of the conservative factions as well. If we had been seeking a Reagan Coalition candidate, that is where we all should have been.
I teach my kids that the only thing they will ever truly own is their honor, and the only way to be honorable is to be principled and true.
McCain is a traitorous bastard. He is without honor. He is precisely what I warn my kids against.
Enjoy your liberal RINO. WHEN the Conservatives won't vote for him, he'll get what he deserves.
Brilliant!
It is this that is the root of the Reagan Coalition.
Reagan said that the vast majority of Americans are conservative, and he was right.
Reagan said that the various factions of Conservatism belong together, and need each other, not only for voting purposes, but because all of the conservative ideologies are interdependent, and require each the others- AND HE WAS RIGHT.
It goes against the spirit of the Reagan Coalition to vote for a candidate who is a defcon, but not a socon or ficon too. None should be made to hold their nose. No faction should be forced to submit to the others.
It is only when we are equally in favor of (or opposed to) a candidate that any of us have power for change. But when we do unite, that power is insurmountable!
It is when we are united that the truth is revealed, and it peals like a bell across the breadth of the land. Patriots rise up, and the enemies of America (both foreign and domestic) cringe in fear.
It is highly important that we stress the meaning of Conservatism, by definition and description. We have to preach it all the time, as many now entering tis forum haven't a clue what rock ribbed Conservatism is, having only been exposed to the "big (circus) tent".
You would be correct except that the candidate would have to display some vestiges of Conservatism to qualify at all, and would have to be of sound character. Traitorous bastards need not apply.
Also, McCain is not a socialist. Look at single digit ACU rating folks like Obama and Clinton for real socialists. There is no point in abusing the term into meaninglessness.
How many Republicans are beneath McCain on that list?
No, that would be more true of McCain.
Obama seeks to destroy everything Reagan believes in.
No, that would be the Baker wing of the Republican party, and McCain among them.
Ergo, we must defeat Obama to preserve our freedom.
No: Ergo, we must defeat the Bakerites and burn down that damnable big tent of globalism, then stand untied against the enemy outside the gate. A house devided cannot stand.
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.