Posted on 02/07/2008 10:29:29 AM PST by Dane
Zot me if you wish, but after all the vitriol towards me on FR, the last two GOP candidates left are McCain and Huckabee, the irony was too good to pass up.
JMO, but a lot of Freepers acted like the left with their stern demand that every person must adhere to a 110% litmus test.
With now McCain's sealing up the nomination and blaming everyone else and their dog, maybe you all should look at yourselves, despite the claims of 20 million listeners or being a top web site, the results are in and your brand of conservatism is not selling where it counts, the GOP primaries.
bump
People across the board get conservative real fast when they elect bleeding heart liberals who get the country in deep excrement in less than three years. I learned real fast with Carter; voted for him in a vapid haze of just liking the guy’s projected personality; then gradually our pocketbook - as well as the whole mood and morale of the country got dragged into the gutter because of Carter’s disastrous foreign policy. Double digit unemployment, double digit interest rates, gas lines, freezing in cold houses conserving “energy”, being warned to forego Christmas lights in order to conserve “energy”, being chided by Mrs. Carter to “wear a sweater and turn the thermostat down”, watching the depressing news from Iran day after day on t.v. with hostages being abused and paraded in the streets in the face of the impotent Carter Administration (the gang that couldn’t shoot straight). After four years of little “fireside sweater talks” in which the President took me to the woodshed and told me I was just in a “malaise” and selfish, when Reagan came along and told me I wasn’t in a “malaise”, that the Democrat Party and their President were the ones in the malaise. I voted for Reagan, and haven’t looked back; but the Republican Party needn’t think that I’m an automatic checkmark beside the name of any liberal they wish to put forth. What shall I do? I don’t know yet, any more than I knew until Reagan came along way back then. We’ll know when we know what we shall do.
Indeed we do.
Hope everyone around here enjoys Mejico...cuz that and socialism is where we’re headed!
Danester LOVES Mejico so it’ll be no problem for her...
I disagree with you.
But, then again, I always have.
I think you’re misunderstanding me.
I’m not saying anything up or down about the particular individuals they picked.
I’m just saying that I think their intent was to unite us for a win, and that IN ITSELF was a good intent.
But each had his own pick.
That was my point.
I have to tell you that this reminds me of the history of Israel. When the people (priests and people) rejected God, they gave them a fool as king. We now will have the choice between 4 fools. McCain, Huckabee, Clinton, or Obama. I’m sorry to say this but I believe that Judgment is upon us and we will have a fool as king to lead us into His Judgment.
That's not accurate. NRO endorsed Romney in December. Coulter early in January. And, Hannity has been pushing Romney since before the Iowa caucus.
Limbaugh had been attacking Huckabee and ignoring any flaws in Romney's record for the entire primary season.
I guess we choose among the least worst socialist< McCain Obama, or Hillary. in all cases we the people LOOSE1
Touchy, touchy. The problem here - and you are refusing to see it - is that McCain doesn’t mesh with us more than 5%, not 90%.
In fact , and I am NOT saying this in an offhand manner at all, I would say that I agree with most of his stands about as much as I do with hillary’s.
And I’m pretty sure she will not sell out her followers either.
McCain/Kennedy.
McCain/Feingold.
McCain - hillary. Big deal, little difference.
vote for this??
You are correct. We’ve not PRAYED ENOUGH for this country!
while we need to “take back” our party the problem is inside the beltway, we the people no longer are in control.
We also need to decide for our selves who our candidates should be since the “liberal media” has their own agenda, and this is not in the interest of the American people!
This was when some in the Republican party decided to fight back, to try to turn back the tide of liberalism sweeping the country. They found that there were many voters out there who agreed with them, thus Reagan's hugh victories. The old-time Republicans were somewhat embarrassed by these people, who took a decidedly Christian view of matters, and that was just not the 'sophisticated' thing to do.
Unfortunately, the leadership of the GOP in Congress was mostly still in the hands of those liberal Republicans, and it took a while to affect any sort of change in that. But truly, conservatives never had full control of the GOP, even though we seemed to be the 'boots on the ground' for the party. And there were still Congressional holdouts who preferred to vote with the Dems against Republican Presidents, because they agreed with them more often. These were the liberal Republicans who used to be in charge, and they wanted their 'moderate' party back.
I don't see anything good about manipulating a race and not letting the voters decide for themselves what they want.
>We’ll know when we know what we shall do.
A Great post. We went to different schools together. :)
I don't agree at all with your conclusions, but it looks like it's waking some of us up (from the nightmare of "Super Tuesday").
Many of us are experiencing the political equivalent of a hangover from it.
I understand the history of the Republican Party, I voted for Reagan in the 1976 primary and saw the nomination more or less taken from him by the group you are talking about at the convention. The party did not change that much after Reagan but what did change was posture. The lying George Bush posed as a died in the wool conservative by making a promise that CONSERVATIVES took very very seriously and a promise he did not have the character to keep. His son, Jorge, ran as a compassionate conservative, which evidently meant that his first act was to let Teddy Kennedy write a disaster of a bill called No Child Left Behind. You are right the liberal elements of the party have always been prevalent, but what has changed was what presented to conservatives as conservative. The price which was paid for that deceit was the loss of both Houses of congress. The price that will be paid for McCain posing as a conservative will be the loss of the White House. What Jorge Bush calls compassionate conservatism and what McCain calls reaching across the aisle is something I feel should be called what it is, and for me it is the Teddy Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party.
Hell no. After the WV corruption deal, not a single Romney delegate shall go to Huckabee.
Sad to say, I think you’re correct. Thank goodness politicians are not my saviours.
That’s his lifetime average. It looks a bit different when you only look at his averages from the past 8 or so years. He’s moved left.
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.