New McCain ad: It’s the jihad, stupid
posted at 2:00 pm on January 1, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
The sort of ad that the press will happily tolerate when aimed by one Republican at another, but when it’s reprised in the general against the Democrats, look out.
MM told me last me night she was shocked to find that even among the anti-amnesty stalwarts of the Malkin readership, 57% are still willing to pull the lever for Maverick next year if it comes to that. Here, in 30 seconds, is why. Exit question, per the new NBC poll showing Maverick leading in NH: If Mitt gets beat by Huck in Iowa and then by Mac in New Hampshire, how long does he stay in the race? Surely at least until Michigan, where he’s still got the Romney name to run on, and probably until South Carolina, where he’ll make his last stand by flooding the state with ads. Follow-up question: If and when he does drop out, to whom do his supporters flock? Fred will be gone before him so it’s either Huck, McCain, or Rudy.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
McCain
nailinmyeye on January 1, 2008 at 2:04 PM
I’ll vote for McAmnesty if it comes to it before I’ll vote for any of the Dembots. I wouldn’t trust any of them to preside over anything more important than a Tupperware party.
flipflop on January 1, 2008 at 2:05 PM
McCan’t.
nosliwelyk on January 1, 2008 at 2:06 PM
I’m not sure why you feel so confident of this. I believe Fred will beat both McCain and Giuliani in most of the early primaries (except New Hampshire). There’s no reason to believe Fred’s going to vanish if he does fairly well in the early going.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:08 PM
And – yep. That is why I would pull the lever for McCain.
Although, one should keep in mind that once the terrorists are captured, with McCain there will be no “invasive techniques” utilized to prevent more scenes like those. But, hey – it still sits better than any of the Dems.
nailinmyeye on January 1, 2008 at 2:08 PM
I know that’s what yer hopin’ and prayin’(oops, my mistake) for Allah. But as far as I kin tell we got a ways to go before THAT’S A FACT.
Just maybe, you’re not as smart as you think you are.
Ex-tex on January 1, 2008 at 2:09 PM
This is NOT a positive number. We’re talking about 57% of conservatives, which means that 43% of conservatives will REFUSE to vote for McCain in the general. McCain has absolutely zero chance of winning the nomination. ZERO.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Because Mitt has run as a generic conservative Republican, if Mitt he is forced out, his supporters will tend to divide “generically” – that is, proportionately to the other candidates’ standings, with marginal deductions for the core supporters who can’t support their hero’s identified political assassin or assassins, or who are supporting him out of unique affinity rather than strong identification with the Republican party. The latter groups should be easily overwhelmed by a stampede effect if a Mitt collapse coincides with general winnowing of the field and the identification of a consensus front-runner.
CK MacLeod on January 1, 2008 at 2:10 PM
McCain does well in states where cross-voting is allowed. In states where only Republicans vote for the Republican nominee, though? Not so much.
If McCain is the nominee, I’ll vote for him but that’s it. No donations, no volunteering.
Slublog on January 1, 2008 at 2:13 PM
Yeah, and if McCain was our Commander in Chief, Khalid Sheik Mohammed might still have his mouth zipped firmly shut, and if they happened to get him to talk eventually he’d be sitting in Leavenworth, KS instead of Gitmo.
What are McCain’s national security creds again?
Allah,
I envision Huck tanking before Mitt, so then the question becomes – where do Huck’s votes go?
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 2:15 PM
I disagree. How would you like to be a captured terrorist and look up to see Hillary demanding answers? What about Edwards? They are both brutal bullies who would be perfectly okay dropping you into a Iraqi meat grinder.
McCain? He’ll want to give you an aspirin to make sure you don’t have a headache from watching free HBO.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:16 PM
This is one great ad! Bravo McCain!
Just heard the Internet at Camp Taji was selling Internet services to the troops and then giving the money to the terrorists. We ain’t over with Iraq yet.
bnelson44 on January 1, 2008 at 2:16 PM
Fred
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:17 PM
I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying (too inside for me?) but if Mitt were to tank, wouldn’t his votes swing to Rudy first, and Fred second?
I don’t see McCain or Huck getting much of anything from a Mitt loss since it’s no secret that the McHucksters loathe the Mittens.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 2:20 PM
I agree
bnelson44 on January 1, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Given the outrageous and widespread BDS and concomitant hatred of conservatism/Republicanism in the country right now, I don’t see the next Pres being a Republican unless a candidate emerges that really rallies the country to the core of its true beliefs. If we endure another terrorist attach before election day, that would help the Republicans (and I’m not hoping for it, believe me). But as things stand, much as I favor a particular Republican candidate, if he slips out, I see a Dem in 2008, and that scares me. Badly.
thejackal on January 1, 2008 at 2:21 PM
I don’t know if Mitt has time, but he needs to strike back with an ad similar to the one Tancredo released linking open-borders and terrorism, only in this case linking McCain to open-borders and terrorism.
FloatingRock on January 1, 2008 at 2:22 PM
The Breck Girl is a “brutal bully”?
I think McCain picks up more than Fred. Both Huck and McCain are self-righteous liberals and they are doing a lot of mutual back-scratching right now.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 2:23 PM
A vote for Obama is a vote for Osama!
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 1, 2008 at 2:26 PM
For the last presidential election, there was nine candidates on my ballot. Only one was “pro war on terror”. That man willing to take a stand against the Jihad got my vote. This is a significant struggle with implications lasting generations. Whomever gets elected needs the courage of conviction to stand up to our enemies. It is all about the Jihad, no other issue matters more.
infidel on January 1, 2008 at 2:27 PM
I wonder why he isn’t touting Sheriff Joe’s endorsement which is a slap in the face to fellow Arizonan, McCain?
Maybe he’s saving it for NH.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 2:32 PM
You don’t think so? People who cross the Clintons end up dead. She operates much like an evil Queen. Someone crosses her and they’ll likely to end up missing a head.
Seems like those two sentences contradict each other. Romney supporters are no likely to switch to a “self-righteous liberals.” They’ll more likely to look to the obvious conservative remaining.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Would you sacrifice America in the process and vote for a candidate with an open-borders mandate?
I realize that a lot of people here would, if it comes right down to it, but I think many will not and a McCain nomination will ensure a Democrat victory.
FloatingRock on January 1, 2008 at 2:37 PM
Ooops. Should have read …
Romney supporters are not likely to switch to a “self-righteous liberal.”
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:37 PM
Fred!
infidel on January 1, 2008 at 2:40 PM
No, this number refers to MM’s site. Extrapolating this out to all Republicans is only speculation.
Bradky on January 1, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Allah’s voting for Fred, as he’s said before.
I hope you’re right, but he’s currently 3rd in Iowa and 1st in New Hampshire.
“Brutal bully” and “Edwards” should never be used in the together.
amerpundit on January 1, 2008 at 2:42 PM
There is no Front on terror if your back door is open.
infidel on January 1, 2008 at 2:44 PM
“Breck Girl” is John Edwards.
amerpundit on January 1, 2008 at 2:44 PM
As for the second point, there may be great loathing among some McCainiacs and Huckabytes for Mitt, and vice versa, but the deeply committed supporters of any candidate will be a distinct minority.
As for the first point, it’s all very speculative, since we don’t know the precise circumstances under which Mitt would be withdrawing. Mitt has run as a centrist within the Republican coalition – he has the mainstream Republican view on virtually every issue, which is simultaneously the greatest strength and greatest weakness of his candidacy (since it contributes to the perception that he just adopts whatever positions he needs to). So the initial tendency would be for the slices of the Mitt pie to be divided up proportionately: If the polls, without Mitt, were 30% Huck, 30% John, 20% Rudy, 20% Fred, then that’s how you’d expect his supporters to go – initially. The same rule generally applies to other candidates, but less so when a candidate is strongly identified with a particular issue or regional constituency shared by some other candidate. McCainiacs are more likely drawn from the same pool as Rudyites. Frederalists may overlap with Huckabytes (though not as much as Fred would like).
The stampede scenario would require Fred dropping out, Huck damaging Mitt in IA, and McCain blowing Mitt away in NH. Rather than spend another 10% of his personal fortune in a losing battle, Mitt might then drop out. At that point, McCain might become the consensus candidate – sorry McCain-haters – since Huck has a ceiling and no money, and since McCain already checks Rudy’s security advantage, is a wash on immigration and personal issues compared to Rudy, is presumably far preferable to Mitt- and Huck-leaning So Cons compared to Rudy, and also has an electability advantage. So, instead of Mitt’s support dividing up proportionately, it instead congeals around the new consensus figure – along with the rest of the party.
That’s just one stampede scenario – but I think it’s one of the clearer paths to the nomination at this point.
CK MacLeod on January 1, 2008 at 2:45 PM
One of the few candidates who actually served in combat counts for something–primarily judgment about what the military can do and what they need. He supported the surge more forcefully than other republicans. He’s in favor of increasing the size of the military. He’s a supporter of missile defense and sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Campaign finance and immigration reform have turned a lot of people off to McCain, but national security is something that he’s more experienced with than most candidates of either party.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Mitt is in through Super Tuesday. The only thing that would get him to retire would be if there is no realistic chance to pick up enough delagates to either deny Rudy (or Huckabee) a first ballot nomination or win it himself.
Mitt will not resign for lack of money. He has made it clear that he will spend whatever it takes to win.
BTW – did you know that about 60% of GOP primaries are winner take all or some variation thereof? That means a 1 vote win is as good as a landslide in CA and some other states. Even after Super Tuesday, a candidate who is a couple of hundred delegates behind the leader can come back.
(That link above is the most indispensible website for the primaries I’ve found so far.)
rick moran on January 1, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Does McCain have a wealth of supporters who could “flock” anywhere? Seems to me it’s much like with Fred–acceptable candidate on these grounds but most people have somebody they like better.
Anwyn on January 1, 2008 at 2:47 PM
The Breck Girl is Edwards, not Hillary. Other nicknames which refer to Edwards and not Hillary are, The Silk Pony and Thumbkin.
As for the votes of self-righteous liberals, I was talking about where Huck’s votes go, not Romney’s.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Wrong. California is no longer WTA. Delegates are awared by WTA within Congressional districts.
CK MacLeod on January 1, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Agreed, but how do we get information out of Jihadis if the one thing we know works, and can be done in 35 seconds flat, is out of bounds? How about our borders? What about closing Gitmo, which causes all sorts of problems?
He seems more interested in coddling Jihadis than defeating them.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 2:54 PM
So, using your theory Bradky … polls are completely utterly useless and Fred Thompson is probably winning by 60%.
MM’s site is one of the most read conservative sites on the net. It’s fair to say that MM readers are a fairly reliable indication of conservative attitude.
To most conservatives, John McCain is the most annoying candidate ever to (claim) that he represents the GOP. He will not win the nomination.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Very cogent. If Huck wins Iowa convincingly, McCain becomes the favorite. If Romney finishes strong enough in Iowa to hang on in New Hampshire, it gets muddy again. Huck would likely fade, Fred could be out. Rudy would benefit from the muddiness before Florida. Rudy’s still in the race, right?
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Not true. Allah has indicated he will not vote in the primary.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Not sure he was ever any good at it though. Sure he can take a punch but can he throw one?
boris on January 1, 2008 at 2:56 PM
I remember hearing that this was being voted on but don’t remember it passing, do you have a link to prove it? BTW it sure would be nice…
doriangrey on January 1, 2008 at 2:57 PM
CK:
You are correct. I misread the legend.
rick moran on January 1, 2008 at 2:58 PM
LOL! Sorry about that. I still believe the answer is yes. Didn’t he actually brag about being in fistfights when he was younger? I believe he’s one of the most arrogant bullies I’ve seen. If I was a terrorist, I’d fear Edwards far more than Johnny-Come-Nicely.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Yeah. That worked out well for Murtha, didn’t it?
Maybe we should elect Murtha to represent us? I’m sure they can both “reach across the isle” and work together.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Which is why Ron Paul is spending money in predominately Democratic districts like San Francisco.
bnelson44 on January 1, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Scientific polls are useful as a gauge. MM doesn’t assert or imply the poll is scientific. Would you trust a poll run by Huffpo or Dkos? Same idea – not scientifically conducted.
Try the ones at realclearpolitics if you are looking for the more scientific polls.
Bradky on January 1, 2008 at 3:00 PM
I disagree with McCain on a number of issues and think he comes up with some dumb ideas–McCain/Feingold being one.
I’d probably have a different position than McCain on torture, but I respect where McCain, and also Powell, are coming from in weighing America’s reputation against extracting information. Given that McCain is the one candidate who has been tortured, and tortured extensively, I’m willing to listen to him on this issue.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 3:01 PM
From what I hear, flying a combat aircraft is pretty difficult in good conditions. McCain did so repeatedly in combat conditions.
Slublog on January 1, 2008 at 3:03 PM
From what I hear he lost 3 planes.
boris on January 1, 2008 at 3:04 PM
I meant to add – So am I! Vote for me!
He probably does not play by the Marquess of Queensbury’s rules. I see him as a biter like Billy Jeff, but I worry that he’d be preoccupied with not messing his hair up.
Besides, his definition of a terrorist is probably not the same as ours. He probably has a lot more animus for Republicans than Jihadis (kinda like Al Gore who thinks it’s George Bush who betrayed this country).
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 3:05 PM
You mean the ones who “claim” to do telephone surveys of “Republicans most likely to vote” but no Republican can remember ever being called? Those surveys? The surveys where you simply have to take their word for it?
Sorry. I’d much rather believe a poll done on an actual conservative site, and I’d much rather trust the fact that if I ask 100 people on the street who they’re going to vote for … I get almost ZERO who answer Huckabee or McCain.
As for DailyKos and Huffington Post, these sites are not mainstream Democratic sites. They are read by far left radicals and mostly anti-American socialists. Michelle Malkin’s site is 100% mainstream conservative. Your comparison is severely flawed.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 3:07 PM
That reminds me:
Michelle had a “which GOP candidate do you prefer?” poll on 12/20. 4,365 votes total (1 per)
Fred won with 37%
(Ron Paul 28%)
Romney 12%
Guiliani 7%
Huck 6%
McCain 2%
Ex-tex on January 1, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Great! He’ll probably do that by recruiting illegal aliens and using illegal alien workers to build the missile defense system.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 3:09 PM
I propose the fred thompson test. Screw the idealogies…which one of these bozos would you like representing America next time the G8 gets together, or if china invades taiwan, or if the iranians implode, or pakistan…or if the russian squabbles with georgia, the ukraine, and others boil over into something a little hotter?
I for one, would prefer John McCain at the table looking Putin/Jintao/etc. in the eye
ernesto on January 1, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Yep, and until the last hour of the poll when it got spammed by PaulBots … Fred was leading the nearest competitor by over 20 points.
McCain sitting at 2%.
Give it a rest Bradky. He’s not winning.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 3:12 PM
LOL – I’m not a McCain fan. But I get a kick out of watching the bases of both parties choose the koolaid that only validates their preconceptions.
Like I said try realclearpolitics.com if objectivity is what you are looking for in regards to polls.
Bradky on January 1, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Military service didn’t make John Kerry a good candidate, or much of a senator.
Having people with military experience, or a respect and understanding of the military, in congress is positive. Having them in the opposition party is very valuable to a democracy. If more Democratic congressmen felt confident of their support for the military, like an Ike Skelton, perhaps more detailed questions could have been asked in the leadup to Iraq, so that we could have been better prepared for phase IV.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 3:19 PM
I disagree; polls, especially MSM polls, are totally worthless. If they were accurate, Kerry would have won by a landslide last election.
rmgraha on January 1, 2008 at 3:20 PM
I have the opposite view where I think his Hanoi Hilton experience hopelessly clouds his objectivity. Moreover, I could not care less about America’s “reputation” with “the Muslim World”, particularly since the enemy we are fighting are not abiding by anything close to the Geneva Convention. I think this brouhaha over water boarding is ludicrous. It’s one thing to pull out someones fingernails and really torture someone, but being terrified is not the same thing as being in physical agony.
Oh oh, I agree with Bradky on something! MM’s polls are largely meaningless vis a vis election results, except as a point of interest and curiosity.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 3:22 PM
There is a huge difference between exit polls and the regular polls run through the election cycle. Those had Kerry and Bush running pretty close, which is how the election turned out.
That is the reason the guys on Fox looked so puzzled election eve – all the previous polls didn’t square with the exit polls.
Bradky on January 1, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Doubt it, but if an ABM knocked down a warhead aimed at an American target I wouldn’t question who built it. I also wouldn’t have a problem with accelerating citizenship for someone who serves in the military.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 3:24 PM
That’s the rumor. In retrospect, his pre-endorsement of McCain – uttered during a debate when everyone was handing McCain gold watches for retirement and long service – looks like a mistake (though not if what would really be best for Rudy is a job in a McCain administration). Aside from probably believing what he was saying (one of Rudy’s weaknesses politically!), Rudy obviously expected to be the one gorging on disillusioned McCainiacs instead of the one potentially being gorged.
Since so much of Rudy’s early support was based on heroic name recognition + security + crossover appeal/electability – just like McCain – and since Rudy had glaring regional and issue disadvantages regarding the Republican mainstream, he was always deeply vulnerable to any McCain surge if and when McCain re-established nominatability. The pre-endorsement gave a virtual nod-and-wink to any of his wavering supporters or potential supporters flirting with McCain.
Rudy tried to expand his candidacy on the basis of executive competence and supply sider/free market economics, but neither seems to generate anything near the passion of, say, 2nd Amendment or Pro-Life. So he’s left to depend on an odd assortment of hardcore supply-side pro-choice waterboarders. He can’t even make a direct appeal at this point to the Anyone-But-McCainers, since he already said he’d be supporting McCain except that he, Rudy, thinks he’s a better candidate. Unfortunately, at the moment, and with every day that goes by, Rudy looks wronger and wronger on that crucial point.
CK MacLeod on January 1, 2008 at 3:32 PM
I’m John McCain and I approve this mess.
Griz on January 1, 2008 at 3:34 PM
You could be right. Being locked in a hellhole for 5 years could have that effect. He has the opinion that torture can make someone say whatever the torturers want to hear. I think that is true.
More important, though, there is tangible value to the United States being perceived as a force for good in the world. As the only super power in the world, the degree to which other nations perceive us as a hostile force would seem to increase their resistance to us from a military, economic, and diplomatic standpoint. It’s not just the Muslim world, but our allies and countries like Russia and China as well.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 3:36 PM
Since the Dems with military service are almost unilaterally a bunch of Leftists, what good does it do? Zell Miller had that one right when he made his famous spitballs comment at the Republican convention.
Webb may very well end up as Hillary’s VP choice, but I don’t know that I trust him anymore than a civilian with no military experience.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 3:38 PM
You weren’t talking about exit polls. You were suggesting that those exact same “previous polls” are somehow more reliable.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 3:38 PM
The WOT is my #1 Issue and why I would vote for McCain over Romney or Huck
But I still rate Guiliani or Fred as superior to even McCain on this issue. If either is still in then McCain wont get my vote.
So Unless Fred Breaks through I will have to take a second look at Guiliani. If he falters then Im stuck with McCain
William Amos on January 1, 2008 at 3:43 PM
What good does it do us to be a force of good in the world if we are defeated by the enemy and no longer numero uno?
The idea that the Chinese or Russians would respond to our example strikes me as hopelessly naive. Russia is a country which uses the most unbelievable KGB era tactics against its own people. I don’t know as much about the Chinese at this point, but if they still have Maoist blood stirring through their hearts, I don’t think they give a damn about how sweet we are, and probably take us for fools for caring.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Great points. If Rudy continues to tank, there is a good book to be written, or at least a long magazine article on the strategic mistakes his campaign made. Could his staff have believed that a national lead was meaningful? That it would survive a couple weeks of defeat when the media is in a frenzy? What did his team think his message to the media could be while the new outlets all focused on the flavor of that day’s primary? A postcard from Miami Beach?
Rudy’s latest metaphor is that its a 9-inning or 29-inning game. Bad metaphor. In baseball the runs all count the same regardless of the inning. Maybe it’s a little more like Texas Hold’em, where getting a pile chips from early hands can be leveraged to take out opponents.
Maybe Rudy should have decided to play hard in New Hampshire. Even a defeat would have at least kept him in the limelight. Instead his absence makes him seem like yesterday’s news.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Yeah, that’s a problem of the parties polarizing. I like what I’ve seen of Webb. It would be better if the Dems could field more guys like Sam Nunn.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 3:52 PM
McCain-Feingold, helping Sen. Kennedy try to get amnesty for illegal immigrants, Gang of 14, Keating 5, not supporting the Bush tax cuts, questionable mental stability…I would NEVER vote for McCain!
davenp35 on January 1, 2008 at 3:54 PM
Talk about scary. Imagine the SCOTUS nominations as President McCain “reaches across the aisle” in compromise.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Numero Uno militarily? We are and will be for at least the next 50 years regardless of anything Bin Laden and his ilk do.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 4:03 PM
How’s it going to feel as you watch the newscast of McCain and Kennedy shaking hands and announcing another “bipartisan agreement?”
Just picture it in your minds and salivate on that for a while.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Numero Uno in all respects. You think the Chinese don’t present a threat to our military dominance within the next decade, never mind the next 50 years? What about our economic dominance? Without a vibrant, free economy we can’t even fund our military.
What if a Socialist Dem wins the presidency and the control Congress? It doesn’t take much to slide backwards. We have to remain vigilant at all costs, at all times and worrying about what Khalid Sheik Mohammed or Putin or China think of us is pretty low on my list of priorities, especially if we’re talking about water boarding.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 4:15 PM
I agree completely. China can’t catch us militarily any time soon, but they could surpass our GDP within 50 years.
I think our well-being depends not only on vigilance but in an ability to trade and work collectively on security with countries like China and Russia. China is a partner we have needed in containing North Korea. Also, China’s need for oil makes it important that they are not undercutting us in dealings with countries like Iran. If China and the US trust each other it makes it easier to crush the radical Islamists.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 4:28 PM
while i greatly admire mccain’s conduct while a pow, i despise his conduct as a politician. he certainly isn’t in the league of jeremiah denton or robin olds.
warren1816 on January 1, 2008 at 4:28 PM
Fixed it for you.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 4:35 PM
I have objections to McCain but immigration is not one of them. I have a pro-amnesty, pro-employer enforcement post up at Blackfive if anyone wants to argue.
Immigration- A Law not a Wall
Cordially,
Uncle J
Uncle Jimbo on January 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM
The John Mccain ad is correct: we do need a President with foreign policy experience. Romney says that a President does not need foreign policy experience because Romney does not have it. John McCain does have foreign policy experience, and he is clearly the most qualified to be Commander in Chief. He has been right about Iraq because he knows his stuff concerning militayr matters, not just because he earned in the Vietnam War as a naval aviator a Silver Star, a Bronze Star, a Distinguished Flying Cross, the Legion of Merit and a Purple Heart.
Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 4:46 PM
if mccain won’t even stand up to the mexican government and illegal invaders, his foreign policy experience doesn’t count for much in my book.
warren1816 on January 1, 2008 at 5:02 PM
The High Reverend Huckster:
Gov. Mike Huckabee Thursday denounced a bill by Sen. Jim Holt that would deny state benefits to illegal immigrants as un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life.
He heaped criticism upon immigration legislation in the Arkansas Legislature, describing it as “inflammatory . . . race-baiting and demagoguery.” He also challenged the Christian values of its main sponsor. Huckabee said the bill, seeking to forbid public assistance and voting rights to undocumented immigrants, “inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem. But there’s not.”
The bill is modeled after Proposition 200, approved by Arizona voters in November. The Arkansas measure was filed by Republican Sens. Jim Holt of Springdale and Denny Altes of Fort Smith.
Huckabee, also a Republican and a Baptist minister, said Arkansans should be welcoming hard-working immigrants of all races. He singled out Holt, who often talks of his strong Christian beliefs, saying, “I drink a different kind of Jesus juice. My faith says don’t make false accusations against somebody.
“In the Bible, it’s called don’t bear false witness.”
In response, Holt said he was hurt by the governor’s questioning his faith.
“I just want to uphold the law and protect the benefits that apply to citizens,” Holt said.
Juan McShamnesty:
“Americans wouldn’t pick lettuce for even $50/hour”
Murmurs from the crowd turned to booing. “Pay a decent wage!” one audience member shouted.
“I’ve heard that statement before,” McCain said before threatening to leave.
. . .
But he took more questions, including a pointed one on his immigration plan.
McCain responded by saying immigrants were taking jobs nobody else wanted. He offered anybody in the crowd $50 an hour to pick lettuce in Arizona.
Shouts of protest rose from the crowd, with some accepting McCain’s job offer.
“I’ll take it!” one man shouted.
McCain insisted none of them would do such menial labor for a complete season. “You can’t do it, my friends.”
Ciudad Santuario Giuliani:
“Two days ago I announced that the City of New York has filed suit against the federal government. We are challenging a provision of the recently enacted federal
Welfare and Immigration law. This new federal law is part of an anti-immigration movement that can be seen throughout the United States, unfortunately.
Here in New York City we know the value of immigration. New York the greatest city in the world was built by the hands of immigrants and it continues to be built and strengthened by immigrants. New Yorkers knowthat any effort to eliminate immigration or unfairly burden immigrants could destroy the very process that is the key to New York and America’s success.
That’s why the City of New York has filed suit in federal court. Our lawsuit contends that the new federal law violates the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution by invalidating New York City’sExecutive Order 124. For those who may not know, Executive Order 124″
is New York City’s policy regarding undocumented immigrants. Thisorder was issued seven years ago by Mayor Ed Koch and then later reissued by Mayor Dinkins and then by me. Executive Order 124 protects undocumented immigrants in New York City from being reported to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service while they are using City services that are crucial for their health and safety, and critical for the health and safety of the entire city.
Joining me in defense of fair treatment for immigrants is a coalition of well-known individuals and organizations who oppose the anti-immigration forces in Washington and elsewhere.
“The Immigration and Naturalization Service will do nothing with those names but terrorize people.”
None of these anti American hacks for the serf running plantation owners will ever get my support. I don’t care if the democrats run Satan
himselfherself.Not going to support any of The Three Bastardos – wouldn’t be prudent.
MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Mostly McCain served as a target.
MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Still, I’ll value that experience over being skilled at the ways to obtain a deferment.
Some in the field could run, like Wilson in 1916, on a platform of keeping us out of war. They’d be able to point to their abilities in keeping themselves out of one.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Again, if you want a lying liberal with military experience, then just vote for Murtha. Have it your way.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 5:33 PM
McCain? He’s a liberal Republican but he’s not a Socialist. He’s not going to cut defense spending to fund pre-k, a single payer health care system, or any of the Utopian dreams that could be our national nightmare.
He may want to fund some of those things, but he won’t do it at the expense of our national defense, and that separates him from the Left.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 5:36 PM
You are referring to Giuliani I presume.
MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 5:37 PM
In 2000 I couldn’t imagine ever having a reason to vote for McCain. My dislike for him only grew since he began running for president this time.
However, at this point I’ll take anyone but Paul, Huck, or the Democrats.
The Democrats already have Congress. I’m not convinced it’s wise to give them anything else.
Esthier on January 1, 2008 at 5:40 PM
Right. The guy who almost comes to tears thinking about how horrible it is to waterboard or play loud music to the poor little terrorists, and the guy who needs a tissue to overcome his emotion over the plight of the poor La Raza supporters doesn’t have ANY negative impact on national defense at all.
I’ll buy that.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 5:43 PM
Mostly. Though I think Mitt’s Mormon missionary work was deemed too important to interrupt for the Vietnam war.
dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 5:43 PM
McCain IS a Democrat.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 5:44 PM
McCain has “reached across the aisle” so much it’s said that his hand smells of donkey cr&p.
Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 5:45 PM
I would have to drop down to a third tier candidate like Mitt if Fred or Hunter ducked out.
TheSitRep on January 1, 2008 at 5:50 PM
I’ll have to think very long and hard before pulling the lever for Rudy McCainabee. I’m not quite in the “my man Fred or bust” camp, but those three are, on various major issues, indistinguishable from the Democrats. Further, other than Huckabee and Paul, there is a general recognition among the Republican candidates that it is a war on jihad, so “No Discomfort For Our Enemies” McCain doesn’t hold any particular edge there.
As for whether Thompson would drop out before Romney under the outlined scenario (Huckabee takes Iowa, McCain New Hampshire), I rather doubt the scenario would happen, much less either man dropping out before South Carolina. After South Carolina, under said scenario, whichever of those two doesn’t win SC will likely drop out (or both, if neither wins SC).
steveegg on January 1, 2008 at 5:54 PM
Not bad – did you come up with that one yourself?
CK MacLeod on January 1, 2008 at 5:57 PM
Excuse me? I’m definitely not on the (Not-So-)Straight Talk Express, but that’s over the top.
steveegg on January 1, 2008 at 5:58 PM
That’s a little over the top! I have acknowledged that those issues are problems for McCain. But there’s a huge difference between a Socialist who Blames America First and is intent on destroying our economic and social foundations AND national defense, and McCain who for all his numerous shortcomings is a patriot who would at the very least keep our military going strong.
I think you’ve caught a case of border fever and need to chill a bit.
But that’s just me!
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 6:01 PM
No.
If the missile had gone over the top, he would not have been shot down.
MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Whomever came up with it, I like it anyway.
MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »