Posted on 08/19/2008 9:45:40 AM PDT by the anti-liberal
Scroll down for updates
Wouldnt put it past him. Would you? Which is why, despite all the encomiums hes received from his Saddleback appearance, I havent joined the ga-ga bandwagon (and wont).
Rich Lowry reports:
NR has learned that the McCain campaign has been calling key state GOP officials around the country the last couple of days and sounding them out about the consequences of a pro-choice VP pick. The campaign is asking about the reaction of conservative grass-roots activists to such a pick and whether a pro-choicer can be sold to them. This is an indication that the McCain campaign is serious about the possibility of a pro-choice VP nominee and that McCain leaving the door open to Tom Ridge last week may not have been merely a friendly nod to a longtime supporter.
Sound off. Guess they didnt hear you loud enough the first go around.
Hat tip: Big A.
***
(T-shirts via Mommy Needs a Cocktail)
***
Update: David Limbaugh calls it
McCain must quit echoing the Democratic talking point that places form over substance and the illusion of bipartisanship above principle. Who says Americans want us to work together if that means abandoning legal protection for the innocent unborn or other inviolable principles?
Update: McRudy?!?!?!
Opinion: a McCain/Ridge or a McCain/Guiliani (McRidge or McRudy)?
(MM's site is notorious for causing images in posts to not appear - if you're seeing red x's I recommend going to the link to view them - so in advance I say 'sorry!')
The only way you have to do this is to not vote for him.
I wonder if Michelle hasn’t jumped the shark. She’s beginning to sound old and bitter.
“Is McCain going to screw conservatives (again)?”
What a silly question. OF COURSE he is!
Maybe not on THIS issue, but he WILL screw us (again).
I got dibs on being the first to say “You knew what you were getting when you voted for him”.
Is McCain going to screw conservatives (again)?
I have no reason to think he won’t. He tends to do that a lot and he’s fairly good at it.
I still do not believe this will happen. McCain/Pawlenty continues to seem a likely ticket to me.
If John Kasich is willing, that’s another possibility.
ping
You can probably count that McCain will screw us 20% of the time. Obama will screw us 100% of the time. In the end, McCain will be better than Bush, IMHO. Except I doubt if it will even be possible for McCain to get any good judges appointed to the court unless the GOP pulls off some kind of miracle in the Senate.
He’s not going to win anyway. Obammy said so yesterday. McCain will assure the Arrogant One of victory when he names a pro-choice Veep.
You don’t win by losing.
That would be lovely if it didn't mean a Bambi or Shrillery presidency.
McCain is a RINO. Duh. But he is a liberal republican. If I were voting without a conscience, as I used to, I would vote for the lesser of these two evils. But I’m not... :) Go Ron Go! Conscience clear.
Then why’d we pick a loser?
Don’t blame me, I would’ve voted for Thompson if he had still been on the ticket!
Its certain that McCain is a better choice than obama. But conservatives have to always hold his feet to the fire.
First chance he gets McCain will sell conservatives down the river.
The VP choice is a toughie. Obama is really of a piece with Gore and heinz’s husband. However, after three defeats the dems are likely to choose a new kind of democrat in the next presidential cycle. They’re putting Mark Warner up for keynote.
What kind of republican could beat warner. He is very much like Romney only his story is better.
We didn’t - the media picked a loser for us.
Seriously. I want to feel good about the decision I make for presidency. Besides, at least I can’t be blamed for whoever screws up the country next.
Maybe our rejection just makes the guy even more "moderate"-- I don't know. In any event, it is what it is, and I am not going whole hog for McCain.
I think this is not the time to risk losing votes for McCain.
On the issues you mentioned:
abortion - McCain is pro-life. He understands that the key is judges. What’s the problem here?
“comprehensive immigration reform” - can’t argue here
“globull warming” - I think he’s being purely political here and there’s no point for his campaign to take a stand against environmentalism. I cringed too when he mentioned it in the debates, but I’m certainly not going to drop my support over just this issue.
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.