Posted on 03/26/2010 7:06:31 PM PDT by Buddygirl
>> Jim Demint for President in 2012!
Hell yeah. I’ve been saying that all along before this Palin fiasco.
I think we still should cut Palin some slack here. Hopefully the AZ voters will choose JD.
You are right about the earmarks and it drives me crazy when Republicans don't differentiate themselves from the Dems that way. But that seems to me a plus for McCain, who has campaigned against them and authored the amendment banning earmarks from the omnibus spending bill March of 09.
We are never going to have candidates who we agree with 100% and it makes no sense to cut off our noses to spite our face. All I can say is, I'd rather have McCain in there than Obama. Say what you will, McCain would have never allowed a bill like Obamacare to get past his desk. He would never go abroad apologizing for this country, nor make enemies with Israel, etc., etc.
Baloney. The Ford/Rockefeller wing of the GOP dominated the party back then just as the current Bush/Romney people do now. And yet Reagan continued to reach out to the establishment. Furthermore, the situation was pretty damn dire back in the Carter years if you recall. In his 1980 convention speech Reagan said:
"The major issue of this campaign is the direct political, personal and moral responsibility of Democratic Party leadership--in the White House and in Congress--for this unprecedented calamity which has befallen us. They tell us they have done the most that humanly could be done. They say that the United States has had its day in the sun; that our nation has passed its zenith. They expect you to tell your children that the American people no longer have the will to cope with their problems; that the future will be one of sacrifice and few opportunities.Was Reagan engaging in hyperbole back then? I sure don't remember it that way.My fellow citizens, I utterly reject that view. The American people, the most generous on earth, who created the highest standard of living, are not going to accept the notion that we can only make a better world for others by moving backwards ourselves. Those who believe we can have no business leading the nation.
I will not stand by and watch this great country destroy itself under mediocre leadership that drifts from one crisis to the next, eroding our national will and purpose. We have come together here because the American people deserve better from those to whom they entrust our nation's highest offices, and we stand united in our resolve to do something about it.
Bring on the hysteria. I personally could less about the MSM, what matters is that voters from the mushy mainstream middle do care. You're living in dreamland if you think you're going to win any elections without them.
MSM is going to have a field day anyway. Their best weapon against conservatives is making them ashamed of themselves.
Wow, now that is truly ironic. It seems people like you and many on this thread are doing a bang-up job toward that end yourselves.
No he wasn’t.
I agree with you about that.
You missed the point of my post.
My point is that in addition to understanding the failings of the opposition party we need also understand the failings, and the potential failings, of our own party, especially when the error that is manifest, the error that Reagan was speaking of, is now attributable to both parties in a way that would never have been possible in Reagan’s time.
If the country was going to hell in a handbasket, and the policies driving that were being espoused by both Democrats and Republicans, Reagan would have applied the same scrutiny to Republicans as Democrats.
I’m advocating for each of us to be super-educated about candidates in both parties, to stop accepting Palin because she is Palin, and start expecting a very high level of conservative principals out of anyone who serves, be it the next Reagan, Sarah Palin, John McCain, whoever.
The lack of viable conservative candidates who are willing and able to serve should not be the determining factor of what we are willing to accept. The people applying for the job as our servants in politics should bring their standards up to our conservative standards. We should not be called upon to bring our standards down to them.
Do you think that union bosses accept anything but the most liberal candidates as acceptable? That’s what we are up against.
I do too! Outstanding.
I am not saying that I believe McCain is the ideal candidate. I am just saying that everyone on here wants to bash Sarah and abandon her for supporting him when she has a valid reason.
Yet, they will praise other people who also endorsed McCain and rationalize that endorsement.
It is hypocritical.
As far as “infighting”, I like contested primaries but the infighting I see is on the insignificant things and allows no room for clarification. I have heard Sarah say on numerous occasions that she is not for amnesty but she is for a stronger border. She did not say in the Greta interview that she was for amnesty either.
I agree ab out socialism, what I do not agree about is Palin pushing McCain’s principles because she rode the ticket with him. She needs to grow some or how can she ever be president?
How is it hysterical to state that your need to compromise, driven by the liberal press, is a part of the problem that we need to recognize and to therefore choose not to do?
It’s not true that you could personally care less about MSM. You are advocating making a strategic decision based on their acceptance and what they will and will not “have a field day” with.
In response to your other point, its really quite the opposite. I do not think conservatives should be ashamed of themselves. But whenever we cave on a candidate or an issue because we are afraid of how it will be perceived by liberals and the liberal press, I do think we are making both an ideological and a strategic mistake. Ideological because we are compromising with those who truly wish us harm. Strategic because conservative principals are best served bluntly.
For example, can you describe to me the best conservative way to be tolerant toward terrorists?
How about the best conservative way to allow illegals to live here illegally?
What the best conservative way to have the government make sure everyone in a capitalist society makes the same amount of money?
These questions and others are questions that those who decide to compromise with liberals try to answer. In fact they are not able to be answered, and should not be able to be answered for the simple fact that conservatives do not want to answer those questions. They are the ideological equivalent of the question: “So is it true that you still beat your wife?” They are not able to be answered without contaminating your principals.
That is exactly where the danger has been for conservatives in the past, and exactly where it will be in the future. Rove understands the need not to compromise principals. It would be great if the rest of us could learn the lesson once and for all.
We can all agree on that. So did Ronald Reagan. He built his career with that philosophy...."Bold colors, no pale pastels." Didn't stop him from campaigning for people he didn't agree with all the time, like Chuck Percy who agreed with Carter more than he agreed with Reagan.
Ronald Reagan was real good at enemy identification...he despised the liberal Democrats.
New Quote of the day:
“I care about the USA, and Palin is now the enemy.”—stephenjohnbanker
___
right on
I agree with you mostly and I respect your opinion.
I would respectfully submit: That was then. This is now.
The more I hear Palin, the less impressed I am with her. This seals the deal.
As many have tried to inform you - it is not feasible to revoke people's citizenship once they have it. It's too late. Perhaps you meant Sarah might try to repeal the law which would impact future illegals becoming citizens? Perhaps that was your point. But clearly no one is going to revoke citizenship or round up citizens and throw them out of the country.
It is a plus for McCain, and the fact that its a plus for McCain is a sad commentary on the GOP and proof that they have not yet learned the necessary lesson.
If Sarah Palin (or some other conservative) has any chance to be the nominee of the GOP and beat the commies in the Democrat party, she will have to form alliances within the GOP establishment that make sense. She thinks McCain makes sense. If she is proven wrong, I'll say it. Can't stand the guy, personally.
This McCain thing is over.
The leftists can hope with as much mental power as they can muster that Palin will compromise her conservative principles, but that’s all they can do.
They can hope all they want, but they can’t direct her free will, and they can’t change her heart.
The only “McCain principles” I have heard her push are the conservative ones.
Granted, he seems to hold these principles mostly when he’s campaigning, but the fact remains Palin’s spoken support of McCain is based on conservatism.
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.