Posted on 01/17/2009 7:01:24 AM PST by rabscuttle385
Remember, as much as we love to idolize the Gipper, he was for amnesty.
As for your second point, would you like a bucket or a bag for Tuesday? I’m carrying a shank because I have to meet up with a professor at an inner city college and there would be the wrong kind of crowd on the bus on the way there. Other than that, I’d join you for the pukefest.
When RR left, the leadership wasted no time starting to show us the door. Oh, they like our money, and our grassroots campaigning for them... but we'd better shut-up about policy! "Just SD&SHU!", they say!
Didn't you-all figure this out during Amnesty, when they called us on the floor of thr House -- in oh-so-condecending-tones -- "the noisy people", and after the election they'd need to "...take care of them"[meaning us!]?
I knew quite a few people at voting at the conventipn. The stage was set for an uprising to get a real Republican -- too many delegates felt McCain was a phony being shoved down their throats...
Then he picked Palin. This was seen (along with his increased oinking by McNothing in conservative mimickry) as a sign he'd learned his lesson, and so he was confirmed as the Repub's candidate.
McPartyHopper tried twice to become a Dumpocrat.
The 1st time, according to those who've spoken, he met with Ol' Dashie (I think) to see if he could keep his comittee leadership position. It might have worked, but Jumpin'Jim beat him to the deed and the Doobie-crats didn't need Ol' Oatmeal Sides to flip the power structure of either of the houses. If you think back, you'll remember the JumpinJim incident had an air of hurried desporation to it. Almost as if someone didn't want to have to garuntee McSillyputty anything...
The 2nd incident was more obvious: Ol' Oatmeal Sides (gee, I like that one!) started whining around about being available for Kerry's VP pick, talking-up the historosity of both parties "'burying their differences to be on the same ticket". He even made a couple of public statements on how absoluely neat it would be for a Dumbocrat & Regurgiton to be on the same ticket -- only a true Pair O'Mavericks would do it! There was a well-publicized meeting between McSillyputty & Le French Hound Dog... (maybe 2...).
Kerry eventually turned him down. No one has leaked why.
Maybe you need to get things in perspective. You are talking about fairly recent events. McCain ran for Congress as a Republican in 1982, so that's when, at the ;latest, he made his party choice.
I still say he's a natural Dem, but the anti-military sentiment of the Dems from the 1960s forward would have been difficult for McCain to stomach with his background.
You are talking about events of the 21st century, after he'd been in Congress about 20 years.
If it weren’t for Rush and the others, no one would know what’s going on and that’s the way the left intend to have it. The socialist are saying we can’t think for ourselves. They just want any excuse to get rid of him.
McLame is an idiot. I voted for him because I wanted the lesser of two socialist and not a dictatorship that we’re now getting.
McLame lost because no one wanted him in the first place. When someone is pushed in our faces and we’re told this is who you have to vote for, that don’t go over very well. McLame was all wrong for the Conservative Party.
Davis is a useless dumb*** as is RINO McLame. He’ll be the socialist’s 60th vote.
It’s too bad the ‘set it out voters’ and the ‘I’ll teach the GOP a thing or two voters’ are the ones to blame for what we’re about to get, or I should say lose.
McCain lost because neither he nor the Republican Party could figure out what they believed in, and what principles they were willing to fight for!! And you can take that to the bank.
saltnlemons
**McCain lost because neither he nor the Republican Party could figure out what they believed in,**
Thank you McLAME for making me what I am today ... An INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE.. and NO longer a member of GOP
I'll bet they saw a drop off in both of those, but not as bad as it is going to be if they don't change.
As for leadership, what I was talking about was his lack of leadership in political terms. He did absolutely none of that, I am sure it had something to do with his concepts of bipartisanship or simple reluctance to engage in any. Whatever it was that hurt the party.
I agree. Everytime I just sit and reflect on the past political year, I cannot believe the best the GOP could come up with as a presidential candidate was 'ol Juan McCain. Sarah Palin kept McCain/Palin afloat for awhile, but McCain and his incompetent campaign staff totally screwed it up, just as I suspected they would.
I suspect that the plan he's worked out with LaRaza is for him to lead in erasure of what's left of impediments to "god's children" and LaRaza's part in the deal is to insure that the brand new amnestied citizens vote enbloc to reelect "The Mighty McCain: Only He Can Win in 2008!"tm
We'll see how perceptive I am over the next 2yrs.
Something went wrong somewhere. Someone on this forum, I can’t recall his screen name, posted o me that Mc Cain would win in a landslide.
LOL at tagline!!
Let the backbiting begin. Everyone else is to blame except for McLame.
That the ink wasn't dry before congresscritters were interviening on behalf of both Big Donors and the illegals isn't RR fault, it simply shows he was human and could make errors. He trusted in Congressmen's "Word of Honor" and The People's watchdogging Congress.
Remember, this was when the Leftys had only just started their major penetration of the Dems -- there wasn't the trackrecord of perfidity to judge the Democrat's actions from, and there were many more honest Democrats then.
There's a huge difference between Conservative Purity (RReagan) and chasing after Socialism (the GOP today)
That you, an obviously intelligent, well-meaning, seemingly honest person twits Conservative Purity simply shows you've been propagandized.
People who complained to "Purists" told us GWB MUST be elected, and we were heels for worrying about his bipartisan-stances in TX, and his professed "Compassionate Conservatism". Are you happy with his actions anywhere but the one measly taxcut -- where he capitulated on permanancy -- and TWOT?
Look, if it is a core belief, then you don't compromise... AND the 3-legs of Conservatism are how the average person runs their life. They just don't know it.
If, instead of cursing purists, we instead insisted on it -- and taught why we'd start to win again.
His mentor (from his own words) was a Dem., and if you look at his voting record, and graph it vs time, the makeup of congress and importance (factoring in vetos and whether there was a veto threat prior) what you find as the top 3 indicators are:
(1) "stand out from the herd-ness". An example is prior to Congress flipping during Clintion. He voted w/the Rs mostly, and his high CU comes mostly from that period. He didn't vote with the Rs if the leading lights of the Left voted against the Rs but enough of the remainder voted the same as the bulk of the Rs and there was no veto threat or there threatened to be a majority that could over-ride a veto.
(2) Expanding Socialism. As long as it didn't outweigh his standout factor, he voted to expand the fed gov and toward socialism.
(3) reelection timeframe. within 6 months for high visibility and 3 months for low visibility bills that were inline with campaign promises he started voting favorably.
Well, looking at the time, I see I'm out of mine. Gotta go on duty... have a good day! Great chopping bait with you!
I think we mostly agree when we’re referring to the same time periods in McCain’s political career.
I’m not cursing purists, I just think we should get as pure as possible. Sometimes, pure as possible means a Rino instead of the real deal. Sometimes we get great candidates, sometimes we get turkeys. Instead of wishing we had legendary candidates, we should simply play the hand that was dealt to us. If we get a good candidate, we get one and we run him or her.
Ideally, running a charismatic socially conservative tax cutting pro life, pro gun small, pro strong defense l libertarian would be a dream, but there’s a little thing called reality. We didn’t have a pro strong defense pro life tax cutting pro gun small l socially conservative libertarian. We had a wannabe socially liberal big spending pro choice libertine who was surprisingly pro national defense with little charisma.
Point is, getting puritan when the only thing you have is a Rino will not spread the message of conservatism, but it’ll only get us embarrassed. Half a loaf of bread is better than none.
In fact, a search of Malkin's site, under "mike.musculus" and "martin.musculus(jr)" {the reason behind the name change is a long story} will show the arguments I had w/the McCainannites while trying to get them to see reason before McCain's nomination at the convention. I found it a lost cause: facts simply didn't matter, it was akin to a religious article of faith with them that Only McCain can win in 2008tm
However, I'm no stranger to disliking Johnny-boy. I haven't liked McCain since he shook the hands of everyone on my flight crew during a photo op for AirForce Times. He struck me as the slimiest human I'd ever met -- it was obvious we were cardboard props, and D@mn-it he should know better!
BTW:
I'll also admit that in the same post I quoted mortallity figures for age groups 35 to 100 and offered to let the reader draw their own conclusions... [wink]
But, if you're attempting to tar me as a McCain booster, I can't let that stand -- you're barking up the wrong tree bub.
Have to go: I'm due at my duty station. Have a good night!
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.