Posted on 02/17/2008 10:20:04 AM PST by calcowgirl
McCain? No Way!
by Sen. HL "Bill" Richardson (ret.)
Chairman of the Board, GOA
Americans are being told by the mainstream media that conservatives have no other choice than to back the hypocrite from Arizona. All that is required is to pretend he is "really" a conservative. "So, crawl under the big Republican tent and vote for McCain," we are told. "Besides, what other choice do you have?"
We have plenty of choices, none of which calls for casting our vote for the lesser of two presidential evils.
First, the Republican race isn't over. Huckabee is still around and as Kansas and Louisiana should point out, the Romney vote flocked to Huckabee. Not that they loved Huckabee, but that they have zero trust in the promises of McCain. Even if Huckabee loses, what makes anyone think conservatives will vote for McCain?
Don't you liberals get it? The republican conservative believes McCain would be a vindictive president. He's proven his dislike for conservatives and would gut us at every opportunity.
Why do I say that? Because of three decades of experience as a Republican California Senator and a fifty year activist in the conservative movement. I have first hand, in-their-face experience with elitist RINO's (Republican in Name Only) office holders. They are biblically ignorant, power hungry, status seeking egotists who have no difficulty aiding their liberal Democrat colleagues whenever their arms are politely twisted. The one thing they have in common with liberal Democrats is their dislike of all conservatives, especially those who are Bible-believing. McCain, as president, would stifle the voices of elected Republican leaders and try to legislate the conservative movement out of existence.
There is no reason why any conservative should be depressed, especially if they look at past history. I clearly remember the political climate in 1964. We newly-awakened conservatives had a real friend running for the Republican nomination. Barry Goldwater defeated a liberal Republican in the primaries, but in the general election, the mainstream media slaughtered him. In 1964 it was easy to do; we had no effective political action committees, no conservative organizations, few pro-life activists, little religious participation, no talk radio, a handful of articulate conservative legislators, no fax machines and zero Internet. After the 1964 November election, all looked hopeless. Not a bright star on the horizon....But!
In 1966, we conservatives elected an actor as Governor of California. I was elected to the State Senate. The thespian and I were greener than grass but we were both quick to learn. Ron Reagan became a national star, a conservative leader in the nation’s most popular state. He couldn't be ignored.
I founded Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners of California. We became the second largest pro-Second Amendment organization in America with membership in the hundreds of thousands. We concentrated our efforts on electing pro-gunners to the legislature and stopping anti-gun legislation. We grew rapidly and were quite successful. During liberal Jerry Brown's eight years as governor, not a single anti-gun bill was signed into law. The reason was simple -- although the liberal Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature, no anti-gun legislation passed from either house to find its way to the Governor’s desk.
The entire gun movement is close to accomplishing that feat on a national level. As long as the gun community hangs together, it will make little difference on gun issues who is sitting in the White House. The same could be true of other major conservative organizations as long as they stay in the fight. We are much better off than in 1964 and much better organized.
The other good news is that some of the weak-sister Republicans are leaving office -- not willing to scrap it out with the liberal Democrats. Hooray, happy to see you go! Call Gun Owners if you need a ride out of town. We have an opportunity to replace them with tough, no nonsense conservatives. Already, some very fine men are seeking these vacancies.
We at Gun Owners intend to be very engaged in Congressional and US Senate races.
I personally will not cast a vote for the presidency -- that is, if McCain is the Republican nominee. Under no circumstances will I vote for either of the Democrats. This will be the first time in fifty years that I have made this choice. I hope it will be the last.
Liberal Democrats must love you people. They have you right where they want you. You’re like children who did not get their way, so you’re taking your toys home. You had rather see Hillary or Obama elected rather than vote for McCain. You’re thinking only of yourself and really don’t care about the nation unless you get your way. I’m no McCain fan, but I am sure as hell not going to refuse to vote and let the Dems have free reign to drive this nation further into the ground with socialism and isolationism. Stop pouting and grow up!
McCain’s “conservative” record. My collection.
FR links on McCain's record from Feb. 2000. MrChips collection.
Neither one? Aw come on. Tell me. I voted 3rd party once.
I have a feeling that, whether McCain wins the GE or not, moderate Republicans will start asserting themselves in the coming years.
I don’t think they have a choice, they’re getting slaughtered at the polls for policies they don’t personally support but vote for out of party loyalty. That’s only workable if the Movement types give the moderates something from time to time so they can keep their seats. We don’t seem to be in that place, I don’t think we’ve been there since 1994.
Think of Jim Jeffords. A few million into special ed funding, and he stays a Republican. The amount of money involved was ridiculously small, about the size of a modest earmark. And the Movement types said no way, and reduced their majority by a seat. That one seat ended up being pretty significant.
Think of Linc Chaffee. All he needed was like 1 or 2 moderate achievements to keep his seat. (He opposed everything Bush ever wanted, would not have taken much for him to keep his seat.) But the party leadership said no Linc, you get absolutely nothing. Now vote to intervene in the Schiavo case.
There are not enough districts/states in the nation with the demos to give Movement Conservatism any sort of working power base in Congress. You need the Chaffees, and McCains. By contrast, if the moderate to liberal wing of the party decides to align with centrist Dems, you’re going to see a whole slew of ultimately bad but temporarily extremely popular bills designed to rebrand moderate Republicans in areas where they are now extinct.
Btw did you hear Charles Barkely the other day? “The word conservatism just makes me sick.” This guy used to be a Republican.
Whew! You got a problem with Thomas Jefferson now, too?
But good, again.
Why thank you, your high-and-mighty-ness.
Now, is Iran at present one of those enemies, though somewhat undeclared as to open warfare?
Is there a particular reason you think I should answer all of your questions, but my posts to you, correcting your errors, did not generate even an acknowledgement? Just curious... before we carry this little charade out any further.
You gave more than two options. Either or can’t be an answer to a multiple choice question/speculation. My answer was to your final summation. Gore? Are you nuts?
The documented reference where democrat Bill Press implores his liberal friends to stop supporting McCain?
Bill Press: All Aboard the McCain Double Talk Express
Or here:
Press: All aboard for McCain's Double-Talk Express
"To all my friends, Democrats and Independents, who have told me they'd consider voting for John McCain in November, I have only two words.
PLEASE DON'T.
For the sake of God, country and Mother Theresa, wise up.
Now that it's clear he's going to be the Republican nominee for president, it's time to end our love affair with John McCain."
I just figgered it’d be fun to try to guess which years you voted 3rd party. So it wasn’t 92 or 00? What years was it? I voted 3rd party in 00.
You think that conservatives who won't cede their principles to vote for McRino, a man who abandoned the Republican platform and works against the principles of conservatism, are having a "hissy fit?"
Who aren't conservatives, incidentally. They are "in name only", fair weather birds, who wouldn't know a duty it it bit them.
Your partisan colors are showing, a position that you obviously place above principles, IMO.
Those, I'd just as soon left politics altogether to take up knitting, and leave it to the grown ups.
Well! You seem to be just the type of egotist that HL Richardson described in his article. How quaint.
Ditto! Write in Hunter!
OK, I’ve answered your question about my votes as far as I’m going to. I have a question for you. Why don’t you argue the case for McCain on his merits rather than on insults, threats and accusations? Wouldn’t that be a more logical means to win minds and hearts?
Of course we’d be against him in the primaries. But he’s the victor. Now, 60% say they’ll vote for him. That means the sit-out crowd is, not surprisingly, a minority of a minority. And many of you are regular 3rd party voters (sit-outers) anyway, I suspect.
Aw. Spoil sport.
I have a question for you. Why don’t you argue the case for McCain on his merits rather than on insults, threats and accusations?
Threats? What threat did I make? Insults? I don't even think I've done that. I call the decision to sit out foolish, and those who are falling for it fools. I guess that's an insult, but I think it's accurate. Accusations? I don't think I made any of those, either.
Wouldn’t that be a more logical means to win minds and hearts?
I'm not trying to win hearts and minds. I'm just trying to expose/analyze/understand you sit-outers. I'm trying to make clear the consequences of your choice. Everyone can make up their own mind. I'm just laying facts on the table.
ROFL!
OK, you were brave enough to admit voting 3rd party in 00. (who?) My mistake in conflating Gore into it before, simply forgot the 3rd party angle to the question. Fast thread. I didn’t say no to ‘92. ‘92 and ‘94. The second time was admittedly ill thought out. The first time can go straight to GHWBs door with his “New World Order,” publicly condemning the NRA and “no new taxes.” Emphasis on dissing the NRA. (McCain has big 2nd Amend. problems too.)
“McCain is still a better choice than OBAMA, and he’s shown a willingness to do business with us, now that he needs us. Thats politics. But, I realize, the base prefers to have OBAMA. So McCain probably will lose. But it won’t be his fault. He’s being himself, and he won fair and square.”
I have never seen anyone try harder to guilt trip conservatives into voting for McCain, someone who has stabbed conservatives in the back more times than I can count.
First, I am not sure the base prefers Obama to McCain. They are disgusted by both. They may have more immediate, visceral and tangible reasons to detest McCain. They have never felt betrayed by Obama. They know he is the enemy.
Not voting for McCain serves a couple of purposes. First, we do not reward someone who has done more than anyone else to shred our 1st amendment rights. I am not sure the RATS could have passed McCain-Feingold without McCain’s unflagging efforts to ram this legislation through. It is his proudest legislative achievement. I want to tell my children that I did everything I could to punish the man who stole some of our precious liberties.
Second, punishing McCain sends a message loud and clear to the RNC and all other RINOs that they will pay a heavy price for stealing our liberties, taking our hard earned money, not securing our borders and rewarding criminals (illegal immigrants). Punishing RINOs is the first step in rebuilding a Republican Party that promotes all the freedoms and opportunities conservatives cherish and hold dear.
Third, not voting for McCain does not mean I want Obama or Clinton to be President. No, voting for them would mean that. Your logic that states if you are not for McCain means you want Obama to be President is also flawed. No, again, voting for Obama means that. That is simple logic. There is a difference between voting for Obama and not voting for Obama. By your flawed logic not voting for Obama would mean I also wanted McCain to win. Do you see the fallacy in your logic. It is simple and irrefutably flawed!
Also, McCain did not win by being himself. He lied and lied repeatedly. He said he was a conservative Ronald Reagan Republican. That is plainly a lie.
You mean 96, right? Thanks for answering. 92 was the easy one. The other, as I said, was a toss up between 96 or 00. I voted Libertarian Party in 00. It was a waste of time. After that, I learned my lesson. In the primaries, try to get the best you can get. In the general, pick one of the two. Sitting out or voting fringe is a meaningless waste of time.
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.