Posted on 02/14/2008 10:33:34 AM PST by Robbin
Romney has withdrawn and asked his delegates to support McCain.
I agree.
They are party-men before they are conservatives. Every one of them.
If McCain contacts Huck with the VP slot one hour from now, Huck will stop campaigning one hour from now.
Hunter is forgive. He never could get the train out of the station. He wasn’t permitted....now way he was going to get publicity unless he came up with a bundle of cash to pay for it.
LOL! You're right, his inconsistency does seem to be his one 'consistency', paradoxically. I'm blown away by the Mittheads who are saying he's a "class act" for endorsing the biggest RINO of all. Some of the posts here have made me literally nauseous.
Praising the Lord is one thing, claiming divine providence as the responsible for your actions is just a tad too megalomaniacal for me.
Rather presumptuous of you.
This nation was founded through hard work of individual men, looking at it through the benefit of history it is not difficult to conclude divine providence at work. However none of those at the time they were engaging in their actions believed their success was assured, or thier successes were divine.
Huckabee’s a megalomaniac, pure and simple.
Lets see.....
New spending annually for proposed programs by candidate SO FAR:
Obama: 299 BILLION
HillBilly: 216 BILLION
Huckabee: 54 BILLION
McCain: 7 BILLION
So yea, I’d say McCain’s a LOT better.
Lets see.....
New spending annually for proposed programs by candidate SO FAR:
Obama: 299 BILLION
HillBilly: 216 BILLION
Huckabee: 54 BILLION
McCain: 7 BILLION
So yea, I’d say McCain’s a LOT better.
Saying that Jesus was right is “presumptuous” of me? Yikes. God grant I get more and more presumptuous, by that definition!
As to the rest of what you say, you’ve provided no evidence, just wild charges. I seriously encourage you to calm down, do some thinking before doing it again.
(BTW, I say this as a non-fan of Huckabee. You’re just being a little nuts.)
Interesting view, but not exactly correct theologically. While all good in the world comes from God, to say all things that happen are by God's will denies the existence of Free Will of the Human Being. I'm not talking about his Super Tuesday speach, he answered a direct question back right after Iowa claiming divine providence as the reason for his campaigns success. THe man's to the left of McCain politically and a megalomaniac.
Nope, implying that someone must not be a Christian because they can see a phony invoking Christ’s and God’s name for their own selfish human goals is completely presumptuous of you.
There are no wild charges, they are Huck’s own words when interviewed after Iowa... you care to ignore the megalomaniac, that’s your perogative.
Oh well, afraid you’d kneejerk again.
Illustrating once more: you can lead a man to facts, but you can’t make him think.
Yes, I'd say you are illustrating that quite well.
That’s so funny. Do you read out of a script? Or are you just eight years old and your parents aren’t up yet?
Well, I’m content to let the record stand; any fair reader can weight content vs. emotional outburst.
“Funny, every time I tried to say this in “Mitt” threads, I was told religion is political, I won’t defend if they don’t attack, talk to the aggressors...”
You have absolutely every right to defend your faith when attacked. Although not a Mormon, I applaud your efforts. Something has gone terribly wrong with people of faith when they feel they have the authority to judge and condemn.
That option does have merit. There are also some problems with it.
Much of the damaged done by the Clinton Administration was done through his administration of the laws rather then new laws. The EPA was completely out of control under Clinton. The ATF was also out of control in a number of instances. He appointed federal prosecutors that wouldn't go after him and his friends and would advance his agenda. The department of homeland security has a tremendous amount of power, especially in the wrong hands.
Then there is the issue of Judicial Appointments. There are more than enough RINOs in the senate that only the absolute worst nominees won't get a floor vote, and the Dems have the majority.
Can you imagine Obama as commander in chief? So much for a useful military. I'd hate to see Hillary as commander in chief, but at least I doubt she would back down easily.
What makes you think house and senate republicans will fight McCain's socialism as hard as they will fight a rat president's socialism?
Bush's prescription drug plan is an example that supports your position.
It'll take WAY longer to pass an amnesty bill with a rat president than it will with McCain. We already know what he wants - why expect him to change?
He wants the same thing Bush has wanted, and we have been barely able to prevent Bush from moving forward with it.
Hillary or Obama would both likely support such legislation. If McCain remains in the Senate, he will keep pushing it from there. If you take him out of the Senate and put him in the White House, you have one less senator voting for his plan, and Arizona is likely to elect a new senator that is tougher on immigration.
You might be right that a Democrat in the White House is what the Republican Party needs to get shocked back to it's conservative roots, but there is a lot more to consider than just the new legislation they might support.
Hunter’s campaign was not well run from the start. He looked good in the first two or three debates, but after that he was unable to vary his themes. It was always, “I built that wall.” Ookay, but we still have a big problem, sir. A president needs a broader scope, a grasp of all top issues. I think his campaign, such as it was, finally died in New Hampshire.
Perhaps he counted on the momentum from the anti-amnesty movement but it’s apparent that wasn’t enough.
A conservative candidate should have a plan for bypassing the media before he ever gets in a national race. Without it, he’s going to get: (1) No coverage, (2) Defined by the media, (3) both.
Reagan’s plan was his incredible ability to communicate.
GW Bush simply had a lot of money backing him, so, even though at that time he was as close to an atrocious communicator as one can get, he overcame it with media purchases.
McCain has been the recipient of largesse from the media. He’s not a great communicator, and he’s not rich. He’ll get party money now, and he’ll get liberal money.
Ya know, Enchil, I’m not sure McCain is not the media’s PREFERRED liberal choice. They seem to have no love for Hillary, and Obama can’t play the role of “Golden Boy” throughout an entire presidential campaign.
At some point someone’s gonna ask why the emperor has no clothes.
(This post was in NO way intended to dis the Mormon religion)
Could've fooled me.
The media will let us know when to ask and whom to ask of...:)
My thoughts: It will be all Billary and/or Obama-rama from here on out with scant mention re mcCain/the Republicans. The clock is ticking on Huckabee: what will he do? That provides a little suspense.
In order to stay in the ratings game, the media will be sure to dig up just enough dirt per candidate to keep us all reaching for the popcorn.
I was reflecting this morning on how the heck did the Clintons come on the scene and ascend? NO ONE had heard of him before the primaries (which started in spring) of 1992. Now, we can't get rid of them.
Isn’t Hillary a Vassar girl?
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.