Posted on 02/03/2008 12:28:15 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
Morella was a coward. When she had a chance to stand up, she wimped out.
Not true. Paul's pacifism flies in the face of the Strong Defense/ Foreign Policy faction. He is every bit as unable to win as the others.
Agree. As much as I respect his service to our country, the fact that he was a POW almost disqualifies him from holding the office. He has said time and time again that he would not approve any type of torture, at any time. Because this is such a painful, personal issue with him as a result of his circumstances as a POW, he cannot be trusted to do what it may take in the face of a real threat to our homeland. Of course, that is just ONE of my reasons for not getting behind him. The others have been pretty well discussed.
I will agree to disagree, my friend. I do not think that is indisputable. I think the independents voters are going to be the king this year and the Republican’s will turn out heavy like they usually do. Don’t confuse the posters on this board to the people who actually vote. If they were typical Duncan Hunter would of been a front runner and be duking it out with Fred Thompson. But, that did not happen. I think McCain will know that he is playing with fire to aggravate the rest of us any more. If not one third of the Kennedy-Bush_mcCain team will be gone and we knocked the Big John with a 2x4 last spring and can do it again. There will be more anti-amnesty Senators next year even if we lose Senate seats as very likely. Craig, Warner,Hagel,Lott and McCain will likely be replaced by anti-amnesty senators of both parties. If Grahmamnesty and Stevens are defeated that could be as many as 7 changing hands. With tough elections coming up in ‘10 I don’t think Spector, Martinez or Reid will want to bring up amnesty either.
Because we have all the guns, and we have all the food.
And if you vote for one of the liberal commie-RINOs with the "R" next to his name, you'll get exactly the same. You can call him whatever you want, but if he walks, talks, and looks like a democRAT, he is one.
The folks with the real problem are the ones that argue who has a better shot at winning rather than who would be good for the country and represent conservative values.””
I don’t know. There is a place for shaping opinions and furtering goals; and there is a place for winning elections. The next president will likely be putting in two Supremes. I want a Repub/conservative doing that, not Hillary or Obama.
Then you're fresh out of luck because there is not a conservative that is likely to get the nomination. Your best hope for conservative judges probably lies with Huckabee, but he has a host of other views that make it unlikely he would ever get nominated. He did agree to sign Sessions' immigration pledge, but it's kinda late to counteract his previous views on illegals.
I do take heart in the fact that it will be extremely difficult for a democrat to get a flaming liberal judge past the senate. You have to find comfort where you can.
I just don't get the line of thought that you are necessarily going to get a conservative judge appointment out of an extremely liberal republican. McCain sides with democrats every chance that he gets and yet folks want to trust him with the future of this country. Strange.
All are fair points, but I make two counter arguments. One, that a liberal republican, which I do not happen to think McCain is (now, Olympia Snow; that’s a liberal repub) is a FAR cry from a liberal liberal, both of which Clinton and Obama (though he is eminently more honest about it) are.
Second, McCain is conservative in enough places where I don’t feel he is going to suggest an outright flaming liberal to the Court.
McCain's closets are so full of skeletons that, were they unleashed, McCain couldn't get elected dog catcher. Unfortunately, the skeletons are of such magnitude that Mitt Romney can't very well unleash them himself. People don't like to vote for candidates that make them feel bad, and anyone who became aware of John McCain's true nature after having supported him would likely feel terrible, blaming that feeling on the messenger.
Mitt Romney would be a long shot in the general election, true. But John McCain would represent a guarantee that we'll either lose or find ourselves wishing "we" (actually McCain) had.
This election is going to bring us some good things though. Win or lose, it will be the end of the Clintons and John McCain, because with a loss they are irrelevant and with a win they will allow taxes to raise and ruin our economy, guaranteeing they sit for one term only and then slip into oblivion. It might be worth four years of hell to see all three of them gone for good.””
It’s so interesting to see a conservative argue for the ruination of our country, if even to prove their points. I’m so used to seeing dems argue for it. Honestly, it’s a little strange. This election is bringing out the damnest feelings!
McCain has paired-up with the democrats on enough legislation, that I have no trust for him. He has said that Hillary would make a good president. Look at what the man has said and done in the past. It is the best possible indication of what he will do in the future. Same held true for Guiliani, but he was never a prisoner of war, which gets McCain more points than it should.
If we don't get the republican party back to some conservative roots, it will not be worth supporting at all in another election cycle or two. Answer this for me: if we continue to vote for the 'party', no matter how unacceptable the nominee, how in the world do we voice our discontent? Who is going to listen as long as they know you will pull the lever in the voting booth anyway? Please tell me.
Let’s just assume the GOP is going to lose the White House.””
A wish of yours? Or are you borrowing a tag line from the dems?... Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
You honestly don’t see a difference between them, or are you mad he doesn’t listen to conversatives more? Are you looking for a way to keep repubs in line, or do you acknowledge this election is a pivotal one in our nation’s history?
Let’s see:
I think he will keep us in the WOT. I think that’s important. What do you feel, specifically, about having a dem in with regard to the WOT? Where will they bring it, and how do you feel that factors in? I feel dems’ “bring ‘em-home-yesterday thinking is problematic. Do you?
McCain likes personal retirement accounts. Dems are outright against them. I think this suggests a wholesale difference in thinking between a classic liberal and a semi-to-ok conservative.
This election should not be only about preserving conservative ideals. We have a country with lots of people in it, who should have a CIC who will protect them and who will not have a default setting of “American-is wrong.”
McCain is a pro-life republican. Since the words “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are important to most Americans, I happen to think he will try to appoint judges who have high regard for innocent human life. I have no such confidence about Clinton and Obama. Do you?
I admit he has not been perfect, but I think the talk of him being like Obama and Clinton is hyperbole.
If it takes a liberal to get a Republican elected in a particular district or state, fine. Get elected, and as a representative in a representative republic, do what you think is right. My problem is with the ones who backstab and undercut the party as a whole just to get media attention.
The BINOs are social conservatives. The Rockefeller Republicans are trying to become the new base — all your base are belong to us.
But they can only do it by pretending to be conservative. They are CINOs.
I get so mad I wanna say: SURFRIUNG. Shut Up, RINOs. Free Republic is Unaffiliated, Not GOP.
What the GOP needs to be doing is formulating a strategy to stem their losses, not some harebrained hail Mary pass to John McCain which will only bring the entire party down.
Do you honestly think the psychologically damaged, war mongering senile senior is going to be allowed anywhere near the nuclear codes by the American people?
Think about it. John McCain is running on two things:
1) he was a POW who endured unspeakable mental and physical angish to the breaking point for 6 long years behind enemy lines.
2) he is for staying in Iraq for 100 years at all costs.
Maybe those play well in a Republican primary, but they will spell disaster for him in the general election.
So yes, if McCain is the nominee then we must assume the GOP will lose the White House. So next we must consider the fall out that will accompany it in the Congress.
An unmitigated disaster.
Among the remaining three, exactly none would "represent conservative values" any more than the other.
There are skeletons in the Dem closets as well. If MCain cannnot win then it does not really matter then they are all lost.
This mess is what happens, however, when you have a party that cannot come up with a program that is right for the time and cannot articulate values or a vision. It is like we are back in the time of Geral Ford.
“”Think about it. John McCain is running on two things:
1) he was a POW who endured unspeakable mental and physical angish to the breaking point for 6 long years behind enemy lines.
2) he is for staying in Iraq for 100 years at all costs.””
I don’t see that at all. My hunch is that neither will the public.
This tantrum on the part of conservatives is about some valid things, but also is bordering on hubris. Conservatives need to remember the ultimate goal should be to further the ideas, influence people, and not to pick up the marbles and go home. You cannot argue for conservative ideas if you are not at the table. I know it’s frustrating but it’s the truth. You cannot gain ground simply by punishing candidates that more people than you support.
And if the entire party is brought down by one man, we’re in trouble to begin with.
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.