Posted on 09/21/2008 4:47:53 PM PDT by Vision Thing
No, it’s McCain’s way of showing that he wants the presidency to be above politics.
I don’t agree with you. In 2004 Bush stood up for our country and led at a time when the entire liberal base and the press were united with our UN and European friends in opposing Bush and determined to destroy us. I agree that the 2nd term has been rough and Bush has made some big mistakes, especially with allowing spending to get out of control. But to say we’ve been leaderless for 8 years is not defensible.
Is 0'Bama part Irish? This response is pure blarney. The USA is definitely *not* in a recession currently. Guess Hussein can't avoid opening his mouth and remove any doubt that he's an idiot. P.S. I'm part Irish, so I can use Irish ethnic humor:)
grammar correction:
Guess Hussein can’t avoid opening his mouth and removing any doubt that he’s an idiot.
How do we know
When he picked Palin.
When he was interviewed at Saddleback.
Part of McCain’s obsession with running to the left. This is the kind of “I really don’t know my economics” BS of last week that saw he poll numbers drop so hard.
I want a candidate who talks to all of us at the same time and says the same thing regardless of the audience. It has to do with credibility and trust.
candidate who talks to all of us at the same time and says the same thing
So, politics and the election don’t concern you.
You just want the candidate to agree with you on every issue and reinforce that every day.
Some issues are more important than others. Amnesty will destroy this country with the stroke of a pen. If you can't support and defend your positions regardless of the audience and tailor your position to coincide with whom you are talking to, you don't deserve to be elected.
And does McCain take us for fools when he puts out a pro-amnesty ad in Spanish and believe we won't find out about it?
Because call me crazy, I try to take Republican candidates at their word. His comments were shocking and deeply troubling.
"He’s not picking Cuomo and we both know it. Hell, at least I know it. It’s idle centrist talk."
No, we don't know that. You'd like to believe he won't, but why would he have thrown that name out there in the first place -- and not just anyone but the very individual, a far-left rodent -- who was CREDITED with playing a substantial role in creating the mortgage crisis ? That's not "idle centrist talk", that's insane talk.
"Think about what you are doing. You are flipping out over the chairmanship of the SEC. It’s peanuts."
If peanuts is about a trillion bucks. This is one of those big warning flags I've talked about that gives us a preview of things to come. If we willfully ignore them, it becomes our fault for elevating said person to high office. And the comment about wiping his hands of party business reeks of the post-partisanship we've witnessed in ultra-RINO Governors while the Democrats rake in all the rewards. Very, very alarming.
"Besides you got bigger fish to fry. Romney has already indicated he wants no active part of the McCain administration. He is already preparing for 2012. Worry about that."
I'm already worrying about the aforementioned problems. Besides, Norm, you never seemed particularly bugged by Slick Willard, and you were quite happy to see him on the ticket with McCain despite my warnings to you for a long time, and that was just as troubling.
Are you having a bad afternoon? ;)
Here’s something to cheer you up: McCain campaigned ripped the NY Times as fake journalism.
Look, there’s a middleground here. No one including me was “happy” about the Cuomo remark. But please, it isn’t going to happen. I’ll eat crow if it does. :) I don’t know about the RNC stuff. Frankly I thought it was illegal to have such offices in a government building. I’ll just say McCain is a Republican and he has campaigned many times for dozens of candidates and raised millions for the GOP. He’s not abandoning the party.
Floating the name of an incompetent hack who may cost the taxpayers a TRILLION dollars is not an appeal to bipartisanship, it’s an appeal to insanity. This kind of crap is telling me McCain isn’t ready for prime time (if he ever was). Bone-chilling. Ignoring his comments just because he’s “our party’s” nominee is no excuse. Knowing McCain as I do, he might very well follow through on such an insane appointment and tell critics to pound sand.
I know, but that's like pointing out the Sun rises in the east. I'm more concerned about the subject at hand.
"Look, there’s a middleground here. No one including me was “happy” about the Cuomo remark. But please, it isn’t going to happen. I’ll eat crow if it does. :)"
It won't matter then, as it will be too late. I've passed out enough "I Told You So" plaques to fill a stadium to all the folks that didn't heed my warnings ahead of time.
"I don’t know about the RNC stuff. Frankly I thought it was illegal to have such offices in a government building. I’ll just say McCain is a Republican and he has campaigned many times for dozens of candidates and raised millions for the GOP. He’s not abandoning the party."
What's he saying is that he won't be aggressively engaged in party activities, he won't have in his employ the Carvilles, the Roves, the Atwaters, et al. It's irresponsibly stupid. You need political gurus/attack dogs around you to handle the attacks from the opposition and to coordinate party efforts. It's telling me that the party is "on its own." And he'd better wake up and notice that we've got the worst crop of NOBODIES running for federal office this year (remember, right now, there is not a single Democrat incumbent trailing for a Senate race while conversely they COULD pick up 10 of ours; on the House, side, we could lose over 30 seats and only potentially pick up a handful, with a nearly 50% chance that we may actually FAIL to dislodge a single incumbent -- a repeat of '06). Now while that is NOT McCain's fault for the recruitment this year, it falls upon him with the election and from that point on. He's got to be active with having "political" people around him to actively recruit for the next cycle (especially if the Congressional people are doing little about it). Remember, even Slick Willard briefly put on a game face in his state for adding GOP numbers until he just simply gave up. McCain is suggesting not bothering himself with this business BEFORE he has even begun. You can't do that. That's highly reminiscent of Eisenhower. It took 26 years in the Senate and 40 years in the House to recover from the losses he incurred on his watch. Put the moonbat left in charge of Congress for that long beginning with 2006 (or 2010) and there won't be a country left in that same period of time. The Democrats today aren't the Democrats of the past when they didn't hate America and aggressively worked to undermine it.
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.