Posted on 01/31/2008 3:57:28 AM PST by Kaslin
Funny, you may be on to something.
My whole impression of this race is which party can turn off their voters the best. Unreal.
The rationale for their existence has been eliminated by changes in campaign finance, means of mass communication, and a challenge to the elites who used to govern both parties.
Very powerful forces are working to seize the moment, because if they can gain control of the process, emptying it of meaning while maintaining the facade of popular sovereignty, they themselves will have more Earthly power in their hands than has been seen in millenia.
The signs are there. In 1992 a paranoid dwarf with no political experience got twenty million votes for President. In 1994 the entire governing power structure was chased from our House and replaced with reformers.
It can be done. But the opposition is powerful, has strong convictions, and will stop at nothing.
Sorta like 1775.
Si si puede.
Here’s a line from VDH that truly boggles the mind:
“...and expressed regret over once supporting the Bush illegal immigration reform package...”
John McCain would have had his NAME on this bill- and he did a good deal more than merely support it- he attempted to railroad the bill through- and kept fighting for it to the very end.
John McCain is more than just a moderate, liberal Republican He’s mentally unstable - coupled with a nasty mean streak. How can it be that no one in the press is willing to address his personal unsuitability for president?
Because the press is saving that for the general election, after they've fallen back in love with the Beast.
Half of the GOP is disaffected Dems who have jumped ship and come over to vote for McCain. It’s a twist on the idea of a “Reagan Democrat.” It’s a McCain Democrat. Unfortunately, the McCain Democrats are a whole lot more liberal than the Reagan Democrats were.
My prediction is that McCain will beat Hillary because these McCain Democrats would not be coming over to vote for him if they felt they could live with Hillary. On the other hand, it will be a pyrric victory for the GOP if the McCain Democrats change the make up of the party in such a way that it is no longer a conservative party.
What’s with all this ‘82 percent’ ACU approval Bulls**it?
Whatabout the: OpenBorder/Judges/14/Taxes/NoWaterboarding/DumpGitmo/WakkoEnvironmentalism/NotoAnwar/ACLUJihadism?
This is not 18 percent ‘bad’, it means the destruction of the GOP.
McNutt is our best Anti-Republican Republican in the “R” column, which is why he’s getting ALL the press.
This line is a laugher, seems I remember it was McCain/Kennedy's bill.
Do you have one in mind?
What’s with all this ‘82 percent’ ACU approval Bulls**it? Whatabout the:OpenBorder/Judges/14/Taxes/NoWaterboarding/DumpGitmo/WakkoEnvironmentalism/NotoAnwar/ACLUJihadism?This is not 18 percent ‘bad’, it means the destruction of the GOP.
Ah-ha, you've seen through this '82% ACU' bs too.
The thing is the ACU's rating is based on actual sit down yay-nay votes cast. Not voice votes, not what happens in some committee, or some back-stabbing deals with Democrats. And for 2006, the last year available on the ACU site, McInsane's ACU rating was a ... 65. And that was based on 27 Bills that the ACU cared about. That's all - 27 stinking Bills and votes. And after getting trounced by Dubya in 2000, the petulant vindictive McInsane's rating was a 68 for 2001. (IIRC that year was based on 24 Bills and votes cast).
Add to that the Votes that McInsane bolted on and voted with the Democrats - those are the important ones. It takes some digging on the ACU website to get into the details, but the bottom line is McInsane is no conservative and if all was factored in (like you mentioned), he'd likely rate with most democrats, like a Joe Biden.
So when I see an ACU rating touted I start digging. Its misleading as heck plus an 82 rating isn't that high anyway. And if one is to compare, John Kyl has a lifetime rating of 96.9% for 20 years to McInsane's 24 years.
Hanson doesn’t mention McCain’s campaign finance law that seriously eroded my freedom of speech.
That’s kind of a big issue, no?
Et Tu Victor? Has V. Hanson shown his own idiotcy here buying into the McCain is a Conservative is just unbelievable!
The more McCain was discovered not to be a perfect conservative, the more he was accused of not even being a good one.
How about Mark Sanford, SC Guv for a conservative governor who was also a senator and understands monetary policy...he has most of what we need in the WH...a little aquishy on AGW and Illegals but mucho better than Juan, Huck or Romney!
Or Haley Barbour — the MS governor that showed the country how a state actually helps its citizens in times of crisis, unlike the Blanco disgrace in Louisiana...
You’re right. McCain’s allegedly high ACU rating is misleading. He was a solid conservative for most of his early years in the Senate. Those years, when he scored very high, are now helping to keep his average up. McCain began drifting to the left when he ran for president in 2000. The press decided early on in that race that they didn’t like Bush, so McCain decided he had a shot at courting them. To do that, he had to move to the left. It created a vicious cycle. Every time he moved to the left, the press praised him. His ego shot upward and he wanted more such praise, so he moved to the left some more.
This ended up backfiring because the GOP primary voters didn’t want someone who had moved leftward. Combined with his natural bad temper, his effort to position himself as a “moderate” bombed and Bush routed him. But by then McCain was hooked like an addict on being fawned over by the media. And he was jealous of Bush for beating him, so he knew that undermining Bush would get him more and more publicity.
McCain knows he can’t completely go over to the left and win the GOP nod. So he continued to vote conservatively on many proposals that had already reached the floor, and where his vote wouldn’t make a difference one way or another on final passage. This keeps his conservative rating on actual roll call votes up in the sixies, which is hardly impressive but isn’t nearly as bad as Obama’s zero ratings. But McCain works behind the scenes to scuttle conservative proposals so that they never reach the floor. He goes over to the left on issues where he feels conservatives have been too “whipped” by Political Correctness to resist very much. So McCain’s liberal votes are mostly on issues where the soft totalitarian political atmosphere prevents conservatives from fighting very strongly (same-sex “marriage”, alleged torture at Gitmo, campaign finance reform....).
Immigration is a good example, though it almost backfired on him. McCain reasoned that the word “racist” is such a political silver bullet that no one but a few fringe types would dare rise up against amnesty. This is why he, Kennedy, Hillary, Obama, Graham, and unfortunately Bush, screamed out terms like “racism” and “bigotry” so often during the debate. It was designed to bully people into submission. But conservatives on occasion rise up against PC enough to fight back, and they scuttled the amnesty bill. McCain sank like a rock, but as the issue has faded, people’s notoriously short memories have allowed him to rebound. The press has downplayed the issue (to help McCain and the Democrats). And, of course, McCain has lied and denied supporting amnesty.
That’s the true John McCain. A guy who’ll screw us big time if he stumbles his way into the White House.
Good men but they did not run, If you are suggesting a name for next election I totally agree.
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.