Posted on 06/13/2008 7:07:31 AM PDT by shrinkermd
Republicans and conservatives are rallying behind Sen. John McCain's White House bid, but not because they are so enamored with him or his agenda. Instead, their loyalty is based on their perception that Illinois Sen. Barack Obama as president, particularly with large Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, would be utterly disastrous.
Regardless of whether you agree with them about the results of a Democratic presidential victory later this year, a McCain victory might produce its own series of domino-like events that ultimately might hurt the Grand Old Party.
...I don't necessarily agree with Stewart that a McCain victory in November would lead to the "eradication" of the GOP, but it's easy to see how a McCain presidency could end up being a nightmare for Republicans.
In the worst-case scenario, a McCain victory in November could likely lead to a Republican bloodletting that would tear apart the GOP well before 2012, contribute to another good Democratic election in 2010 and hand Democrats such a strong advantage during redistricting that Republicans wouldn't be able to recover for years.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
“How are Obama’s loyalties anymore questionable than McCain’s?”
Are you KIDDING US? Where have you been?
http://no-bama.blogspot.com/2008/05/obamas-communist-and-socialist-roots.html
Obama’s Communist and Socialist Roots
1. Obama’s Father Was a Socialist
http://gregransom.com/prestopundit/2...-obamas-d.html
2. Obama’s Mother Was a Communist Sympathizer
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/front_page/jb26aa01.html
3. Obama’s teen Mentor was Frank Marshall Davis (a known communist)
http://www.worldnetdaily.co m/index.php?fa=PAGE.vi ew&pageId=65066
http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/hawaii-obama.pdf
http://www.aim.org/aim-report/is-bar...-marxist-mole/
4. Obama Attended Socialist Conferences at Cooper Union
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/01/14/2007-01-14_obamas_quiet_yrs_ in_nyc_pols_rise_stu ns_.html
5. Obama was hand picked by Alice Palmer, a known communist, to succeed her in the Illinois state senate
http://www.worldnetdaily.co m/index.php?fa=PAGE.vi ew&pageId=65066
http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/chicago-obama.pdf
6. Obama’s run for the Illinois state Senate was launched by a fundraiser organized at Bill Ayers’ and Bernardine Dorhn’s Chicago home. Ayers is a former terrorist from the Weather Underground and communist
http://www.worldnetdaily.co m/index.php?fa=PAGE.vi ew&pageId=65066
http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/chicago-obama.pdf
7. Obama attended several meetings with the Democratic Socialists in Chicago
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas...t-connections/
http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/chicago-obama.pdf
http://www.aim.org/aim-report/is-bar...-marxist-mole/
8. Obama endorsed openly socialist senator Bernie Sanders
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIlIpOkRh2A
9. The Chicago Democratic Socialists Endorsed Obama
http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng45.html
10. The Communist Party USA Endorsed Obama:
“Our Party actively supported Obama during the primary election.”
http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/858/1/39/
(This line has since been removed from the CPUSA website)
11. Obama’s church is rooted in black liberation theology, liberation theology is rooted in Marxism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUdjhKbImwE
(about half way through covers this)
12. The band that opened for Obama’s Oregon rally (The Decemberists) is named after an 1825 revolt over the Imperial Russian succession (Decembrist revolt) that Meloy views as an attempted communist revolution. They also open many of their shows by playing the Soviet National Anthem...
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/communists-for-obama/
13. Michelle Obama’s Marxist Thoughts...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMLeamM7Jkk
There are many more references, you can get to a lot of them via the links provided above.
Actually, unlike Giuliani, I tend to give McCain the benefit of the doubt on this one. He's made it very clear he opposes judicial activists on the court and has put up a strong fight throughout his Senate career to confirm conservative nominees. Yea, he also voted to confirm Darth Bader Ginsburg, but so did 97 other Senators (this just shows that Republicans need to grow a pair when it comes to stand up against far-left Dem appointments) There was an excellent thread on FR about what Obama appointees vs. McCain appointees would look like, citing the recent 5-4 Guetanmeno Bay decision and how Obama and McCain had completely opposite reactions and gave entirely different visions on how they'd like the next court to unfold.
Now, whether McCain will actually be able to get conservative judges through a RAT Senate is another question, but I do believe he'll make the effort to appoint what he believes to be conservatives.
>> It’s worth noting that Republicans have chosen some of the worst activist liberals in the 20th century for the courts. Jimmy Carter didn’t appoint Stevens, Jerry Ford did (and Ford, even up to his death KNOWING how leftist Stevens was, NEVER regretted his appointment). Ike appointed the ultimate judicial scum of the 20th century, Earl Warren. <<
Bob Woodward's book "The Brethen" covers the Stevens appointment. Basically, Ford was told he would never get a RAT Senate to replace liberal icon William O. Douglas with a conservative (they told him a Bork nomination would be voted down, and this became a reality when Reagan tried it in 1987), so he was hoping to appoint a woman and a "centrist". The only qualified prominent female lawyer in 1976 was one his cabinet members, and she would have been rejected because of allegations of cronyisms. Ford finally narrowed it down to Midwest lawyers, a flashy, boisterous one, and a humble Chicago corporate lawyer, and he appointed the "humble" one. That turned out to be Stevens. You're right that Stevens turned out to be a far-left moonbat and not a "centrist", and that goofy Jerry Ford never expressed regret over it.
We can thank John Sununu for David Souter, he was an old friend of Souter's who told Bush he was absolutely certain (just as he was absolutely certain that Fred Thompson never did legal work for an abortion group) that Souter would be a "home run for conservatives". When he got word he was under consideration, Souter assured Bush that he was a "strict constructionist" (as did the four Nixon appointees that turned out to be wobbly). Souter had only a year on the NH Supreme Court and had issued no rulings on hot button issues. So the buzz at the time was that Souter was "Bork without a paper trail" and he was confirmed over several Dems loudly objecting and claiming he was a Trojan horse for hard conservatives. Since then, they've been "pleasantly surprised" that Souter is a slimy liberal who simply told Bush what he wanted to hear to get on the court.
I think the Souter appointment and 3 out of 4 of the Nixon appointees show that a judge proclaiming to be a "strict constructionist" or an "originalist" means nothing, despite all the freepers demanding Bush appoint an "admitted originalist" regardless of their conservative track record. Republican Presidents need to appoint a lifelong CONSERVATIVE with a track record to match it, not a judge who just claims to be on their side and says he shares their judicial philosophy. I think conservatives we wise to oppose the Harriet Miers nomination, she had no ideological views and was simply a longtime "personal friend" of Dubya, and could have "evolved" into a leftist after Bush left office.
Speaking of bad GOP appointments, instead of listening to all the freepers who think things would be soooooooooo much better if we let government bureaucrats choose our Senators FOR us (I wouldn't trust my gerrymandered RAT state legislature to pick out what I'm having for breakfast, let alone pick my Senator for six years), perhaps we should go the opposite direction and consider having an ELECTED U.S. Supreme Court. In Illinois, our state Supreme Court is elected and the judges selected by the voters are infinitely superior to the kind of court we would have gotten over the last 30 years if Jim Thompson, Jim Edgar, George Ryan, and Rod Blagojevich had selected their judges. We don't have any Souters or Stevens on the Illinois Supreme Court because Republican judges have to make it thru the primary and any RINOs are weeded out at that time. For instance, in the 2nd district (DuPage Co. and western Illinois), establishment conservative judge S. Louis Rathje was appointed judge to fill out the remainder of someone else's term and then he faced a primary against "moderate, centrist" judge Bonnie Wheaton (whose family had founded and basically owned the town of Wheaton), and grassroots reform conservative judge Bob Thomas, a former Chicago Bear. Thomas energized the base, won the primary, won the general over a RAT, and is now Chief Justice of the Illinois Supreme Court, so we have a conservative leader on our court in a state otherwise dominated by Dems right now. In 2004, we also replaced the retiring ultra-liberal southern Illinois justice with a good conservative Republican, Judge Lloyd Karmeier. It's the first time we've held that seat in 30 years. Imagine if Blago had been the one to appoint the replacement. ::shudders::
Republicans hold 3 out of 7 seats on the Illinois Supreme Court, and all three of them are good conservatives. Cook County gets three seats at-large, and even though they're technically "elected", they are chosen by the Dem leaders behind closed doors and then run unopposed in the general election. Even those judges turned out to be not that bad, due to the Dem factions having to "compromise" they didn't get the moonbats they hoped for.
So, say what you want about it, but a Souter or Stevens would have a much harder time making it thru a primary election, and we could get Republican judges on the U.S. Supreme Court during an Obama presidency.
>> Conversely, JFK appointed Byron “Whizzer” White, who turned out to be a fairly model justice and was not a leftist. Another potential Dem appointee that almost ended up on the Supremes was former Virgin Islands Governor William H. Hastie. Hastie was a Black Conservative who was bitterly opposed by both Warren and racist Dems like MS’s Sen. James Eastland. Instead, the ultraleft imbecile Thurgood Marshall became the 1st Black on the court. <<
I agree with that, shameless self-promoter Ann Coulter was dead wrong (yet again) when she insisted no Dem President has accidentally appointed a conservative judge. Byron White had been a longtime donor to JFK and the Dems and a friend of big labor, so he was expected to be a reliable Dem vote on the court. Instead, he ended up being right of center. There would probably be more examples in recent memory except Clinton only appointed two judges and Carter appointed none. It's very hard for a President -- in either party -- to correctly predict how his judge will turn out unless they have a long paper trail.
Fortunately the world doesn’t revolve around what Limbaugh, or any other talk radio talking point pinhead, believes.
McCain’s a one termer, and I think even he knows this... and honestly its probably a damned good thing. McCain is also someone who, like him or hate him, doesn’t fit into any mold classification. The left will try to paint him as a radical rightie.. the radical righties will try to paint him as a RINO... and the truth is he doesn’t fit either mold.
I think knowing that he’s a one termer (his age, and his political background) almost assures that he will make the decisions he feels is right for the nation, not his re-election. Not saying I will agree with every decision he will make, but I think this is going to mean he’ll be far more free in his decision making that a first termer of any party. He’s shown he’s not afraid to go against his party if he things its the right thing (which has ticked off a lot of folks there) and he’s shown he’s not afraid to stand up to the other side either when he feels its the right thing. I think with all the crap that’s gone on lately a one termer who can’t be pigeonheld to any mold is probably what the nation needs more than anything.
If you are worried about the long term location of the party, the VP pick will tell you more about that than anything.
There is no Reagan waiting in the wings folks... look around... he’s not there.. and giving the white house to a marxist like fauxbama won’t bring him about. Reagan was a once a century thing... the right person, at the right moment, with the right stuff. If you take him out of time and move him somewhere other than where he was.. you don’t get the same result.
“(McCain) has put up a strong fight throughout his Senate career to confirm conservative nominees.”
FALSE!!
Oh silly me. All these articles citing proof that for the last 20+ years, McCain unequivilently supported judges Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, Bork, Roberts, Alito, etc. -- EVEN when he was far outnumbered by liberal Senators like during the Bork nomination -- must be lying.
McCain: Roberts, Alito are model judges
McCain Slams Obama on Judges : Stop The ACLU
John McCain’s Best-Kept Secret: No pro-life makeover required.
McCain pledges more conservative judges
McCain's Ideal Justice - Antonin Scalia
Political Radar: McCain Blasts 'Activist Judges'
John McCain and Barack Obama: Two Visions of the Supreme Court
McCain on His Judicial Philosophy
McCain on his 1987 support of Robert Bork
A McCain Court: Likely Less Than Maverick
Perhaps you can "enlighten" us all with evidence that he opposed the nomination of conservative judges. Feel free to post all of the "proof" he was against Bork, Scalia, Thomas, etc. I won't hold my breath.
“Perhaps you can “enlighten” us all with evidence that he opposed the nomination of conservative judges.”
Gang of 14.
Apology accepted.
Gang of 14 was responciple for the CONFIRMATION of CONSERVATIVE judges Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, and William Pryor, which would have otherwise been filibustered forever. Justices Alito and Roberts were also confirmed post Gang of 14 agreement.
Had the nuclear opinion been used, the now Republican-minority in the Senate would be powerless to stop any socialists from being appointed by a DemocRAT Presidency, so Obama would have carte blance to get any commie he wanted confirmed by a RAT Senate.
>> Apology accepted. <<
I accept your apology in admitting you were wrong. Janice Rogers Brown would looking for a job in California right now if it weren't for McCain. I too, initially thought the Gang of 14 would ruin the confirmation of any conservative judge, but since then got my head out of my ass and looked at the actual RESULTS six years later, as have many conservative pundits in admitted the RESULT of Gang of 14 was a net gain for conservatives.
You can have a mulligan and try again.
Really. Just one example. Shouldn't be that hard.
First mark this down as the first crack in the phony “this is a rat year” bull shiite. barack mcgovern IS going to lose and stuie KNOWS it.
Next personally I don’t give a damn about the Republican Party or conservatism for that matter if it comes down to and either or situation. In that case AMERICA comes first. I am an American before I am a conservative and certainly before I am a Republican. But thanks for stepping up stuie, believe me it will get easier to tell the truth as the month go by.
John McCain contributed to the appointments of Pricella Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, and others. So if he’s elected President, the end of Roe vs. Wade is a possiblity. What kind of judges do you think Obama would appoint?
If it weren’t for the WOT and the Supreme Court, I might agree with the “let Obama win so that conservatives can benefit from his mistakes.” I’m not thrilled with McCain. But right now, there’s too much at stake.
I would counter that Weld and Romney (and Celucci) were the only types of Republicans that were going to get elected. In 1972, years before Weld or Romney stepped onto the scene, MA was the only state to vote for McGovern. It’s a lot more complex than can be explained but it’s decline has less to do with Romney and Weld than with issues such as demographic change and the Kennedy realignment. How would one explain Vermont then, which was easily more of a GOP bastion than MA ever even in its glory days was?
btt
Although it is not true in your case, I’ve found that the dishonesty and stupidity exhibited by some McCain Freepers(oxymoron?!) pushes me further away from the Arizonan.
Thought you might enjoy post 27.
LOL. I suggest you frequent places where Obamaniacs congregate and you will find a recalibration of the term ‘stupidity’ in order. Man are these Obama-lovers naive and clueless!
Come to Y Answers and you get to answer questions such as:
“Isn’t Obama the sexiest candidate ever?”
Is McCain the worst republican candidate since Nixon (who beat his wife)?
and
If McCain is elected President, how long do you think it will be until he decides to place troops in Vietnam??
Has anyone heard of the NY exhibit of assassinating Barack?
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/;_ylt=Ahr5TSTAkjPS1BuiSy3FoY_S7BR.;_ylv=3?link=list&sid=396547134
Hear hear and well said.
Schumer is licking his chops at a possible sweep in November to near filibuster status. If obama gets in, the entire Federal court system will shift Massively Left.
This is quite possibly the worst election for conservatives in a generation and we need to wake up and do something about it!!!
“I think knowing that he’s a one termer (his age, and his political background) almost assures that he will make the decisions he feels is right for the nation, not his re-election.”
I believe he can assure his election if he commited up front to being in there for one term. The Hillary supporters and Democrats would defect to him, knowing he is a placeholder.
And conservatives could warm up especially if we lined up a 2012 conservative pick.
“First mark this down as the first crack in the phony “this is a rat year” bull shiite. barack mcgovern IS going to lose and stuie KNOWS it.”
All the real money bets are giving Obama a 60% chance and Mccain a 40% chance of winning. If you disagree, go ahead and put some money down and make a mint in November.
Polling right now is awful, and Schumer thinks he can pick up many senate seats. We have to fight it.
“Next personally I don’t give a damn about the Republican Party or conservatism for that matter... In that case AMERICA comes first. I”
The Republicans have been fighting for the good of the country for some time, and giving them the back of your hand is one way to place USA in the hands of the wrong crowd. Its not good for America to let the Democrats own the Federal Govt lock stock and barrell.
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.