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.
And that's why you and others prefer Obama this year. I understand your argument. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. You want Obama to win.
Meanwhile, the contest is between the GOP and the DEM. The GOP needs to get more votes than the DEM. If a likely GOP voter, a conservative voter, stays home, thats -1 GOP. There's no such thing is 0, especially not for you. It's either +1 or -1. And a -1 is like a + .5 for the DEMs.
McCain is unstable, a danger with the military in his hands. Meanwhile he supports open borders even when the country is already infused with terrorists. He is on record preferring to dis-empower citizens from separating illegals from citizens. He has supported virtual police state security measures from national ID to tracking databases instead, preferring not to do anything about the border.
Not a strength in my book.
The 2006 Congressional election says there is.
The 06 election proves my point. Ladies and gentlemen....Speaker Pelosi!
No, it proves mine. The degree to which "Speaker Pelosi" cultivated public revulsion gave conservatives the greatest opportunity in a generation, one which the Republican Party leadership deliberately booted. She accomplished virtually no harm at all all the RINO shrieking and wailing to the contrary.
Now we face two of the weakest Democrat candidates in memory, one hated shrill power freak and the other an airhead Marxist, either of which a capable conservative could have beaten in the general election. "Speaker Pelosi" was a Godsend who had retrained the public why they hate leftists at minimal cost, and the GOP blew it.
So what did the GOP do? Water down the conservatives in almost equal segments and let Democrats pick our candidate in early open primaries. They ran one military guy, one border guy, one evangelist, one "he can win," and even a Mormon to clear out that fraction. Then pile up all the primaries so that only a national candidate with name recognition mattering only to Internet-incapable geriatrics so that he could come out with a plurality. Then all of the segments dropped right on cue. It was brilliant in that now we've got the usual "anointed leader" with an open antipathy for conservatism. Time for the RINO swan dive in the general.
OOPS, committing the Democrats to McCain to get him nominated gave the Marxist enough MO to beat the globalist ice queen. Now they're squirming, because Obama actually means what he says (even if he doesn't know what it means). Now they're sweating.
Who are "they"? The corporate crooks who give money to both sides.
IMO it's our fault, right here on FR. We're the heart of conservative activism with absolutely no clue how to wield that power. Had we narrowed our support and backed a single candidate a year EARLY, he might have had a chance. IMO the best was Hunter. Huck is a closet statist. Tancredo was branded as "single issue." Thompson's dallying should have been a red flag that it was the globalist fan dance it turned out to be. Romney never was, no matter what the blinded Mormons on the forum believe. Had FR taken the risk to its cash flow and laid down the law early, IMO we wouldn't be in this mess.
I tolja so.
Your point is that it's for our own good; we're better off that way. I understand that that's what you believe.
My point is supported by history: RINOs unopposed are worse than leftists with opposition. Between Nixon and Schwarzenegger you should have learned from it by now. The example you cited proves the point, because Pelosi has accomplished NOTHING.
You might be interested in some of these enlightening snippets (scroll down) about what John McCain's sidekick, Jack Kemp, has been up to lately.
It's obvious that the Huck account is a partisan subscriber who ended up on FR by accident, thinking it was a partisan organ. Many came in 2000 and some still don't get it.
FreeRepublic is conservative, not partisan. Our actions are grass roots, not national. We represent less than 40% of one political party and we will never control anything. The best we can do is to influence the Republican Party and that we can do because of our numbers; 15% of the electorate.
Not voting for their presumptive nominee, an old, dishonest, angry, little man who hates conservatives is not only productive but essential for our continued influence. The loss of 15% of the electorate will make McCain uncompetitive. If conservatives not only refuse him franchise, but also actively work to accomplish his defeat, McCain's defeat is assured.
Conservatives are not concerned that liberals will hold the executive for four more years but are concerned that a Republican liberal should not achieve high office. California has had a Republican liberal in the executive for several years now and the result has been both a fiscal and social disaster. We don't need an idiot like Schwarzenegger at the national level.
Yes Huck, voting for Not-McCain does have a worthwhile goal ... from a conservative standpoint.
McCain’s “conservative” record. My collection.
FR links on McCain's record from Feb. 2000. MrChips collection.
There is your irrefutable proof.
Well, go ahead and give the election to Obama. Just don’t whine when socialist train rolls on down the tracks because you refused to stand in the way. Go ahead and cut your nose off to spite your face. Obama is speaking now — he will be happy if you sit out!
McCain has done more to grease the wheels of the socialist train than Obama and Hillary put together.
Ha!
Good one, potlatch!
Love them skinny legs! ;o)
Ha!
Good one, potlatch!
Love them skinny legs! ;o)
Lol, just put his head on an existing gif. Doubt he ever dressed like that!!
Incorrect.
FreeRepublic is conservative, not partisan... The best we can do is to influence the Republican Party
What? I thought you said Free Republic was non-partisan? Why not try to influence all parties? Why just the GOP.
The answer, of course, is obvious. It's because the GOP is the only viable home for conservatism. Third parties are pointless ( I mentioned this once already but you didn't seem to get it.) And the DEM party has no room whatsoever for conservatives. Hence, it is as it has been for sometime now. You either work with the GOP, or you're out in the cold.
The loss of 15% of the electorate will make McCain uncompetitive. If conservatives not only refuse him franchise, but also actively work to accomplish his defeat, McCain's defeat is assured.
As is a DEMOCRAT victory. Read my tagline, I understand exactly what you are trying to accomplish--an OBAMA victory. However, with 60% of freepers saying they'll do the right thing and vote McCain, I don't think your 15% will hold together for you. I predict it'll be closer to 5%. Enough to help the DEMs win.
Conservatives are not concerned that liberals will hold the executive for four more years but are concerned that a Republican liberal should not achieve high office.
Interesting. ALL conservatives think the exact same thing on it? So all those conservatives saying they're gonna vote for McCain are just fakes! Real conservatives want OBAMA this year.
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.