Bush the Spending Hawk. – Well, that’s a little late.
McCain the Anti-Conservative.
Clinton on Global Warming. He almost made a point.
Rally for Romney – Mark Levin lays it out.
EXCLUSIVE – Obama’s Nation of Islam Staffers, Edward Said & “…

Michael, Michael, where did you go so wrong. First you were all on board with Huckabee, going so far as to say he was a first teir candidate when he won the I.O.W.A. (Idiots Out Wandering Around) cacuses, and now McCain is a conservative?! I think you need to go back and re-read Right Turns and get your barings straight.

P.S. It doesn’t take much to be more conservative than the president on domestic spending. I think even Jack Murtha can make that claim.

How many people have you met that agree with you 100%?

Very few, but that’s because I’m a ridiculous right-winger who grew up Southern California and went to college at UC Santa Cruz. Medved is not a bad person, persay. But he’s not indicative of modern conservative thought. He’s really just a stubborn orthodox Jew.

Do you have a personal issue with Medved?

Yes, I do, but that doesn’t change the fact that his stance on the border is uninformed, naive and simply stupid. He’s no strong conservative. He’s simply a loud and outspoken person who, like a broken clock, happens to be right twice a day.

You gotta be kidding. He’s a strong Conservative, who supports a strong defense, the war on Jihadi Nazis, is pro-life, pro-marriage, ect. ect. Do you have a personal issue with Medved?

There is no debate he is extremely well informed- he’s full of facts- and he makes good use of those facts supporting his arguments.

Well-informed? His position on the border is ridiculous! There is no logic to it. He is just a populist goober. How can you like somebody who makes Randy Rhodes look insightful?

I agree with Medved a lot, but his view on illegal immigration and support of McCain confuse me. I think he wants the Hispanic vote more than he wants to secure the border.

Michael Medved is a brilliant man and a superb debater.

Actually, no. Michael Medved is an arrogant putz who I’ve known since I was a child. As Gartrip suggest, Medved should go back to movie reviews. He is nearly as insightful as a pet rock.

How can we trust him to nominate anyone other than the Ted Kennedy-sponsored choice? How can we trust him to nominate a constructionist and not the ‘consensus’ candidate (like he is so fond of doing)?

Is adopting that argument meaning having to take a ginormous leap of faith?

Where he first lost me was awhile back when Romney and Giuliani went at it over illegal immigration and Rudy took the cheap shot about Mitt having a “sanctuary mansion”. The next day Medved bristled about this exchange and to my astonishment decided that Mitt had behaved badly.

When people call in and disagree over other issues he treats them with obvious disdain in that whiny voice of his. He
steps all over them and doesn’t let them explain their positions before he interrupts and begins whining. I’ve heard some very smart, reasonable callers be treated very badly by him. It’s obnoxious and quite the contrast to how Rush handles callers.

Medved: Rush is acting like a liberal

Fixed it for ya

Adults know that sometimes you have to decide between several very bad options, but you do it because it is the right thing to do.

georgealbert on January 31, 2008 at 7:51 AM

In other words, “Simmer down, children.”

Again, how could the better part of the Republican party not be falling in love with patronizing condescension?

Hey folks, while core values and ideas can last forever, politics is merely a business. People that believe in core values don’t change with the election cycles, rather they use the elections to move their agenda forward as much as possible, even if that means it just not reversing.

Rush has been very clear on one thing because despite this, he gets it; and that is that there will be more elections and so we move ahead as we can.

Frankly, the situation with the Islamist terrorists is much worse than most people are aware of and the insiders know that. Winning that battle means we can have more elections under the Constitution and so we will go forward.

Unfortunately the actual battles with the Islamists will be so dominant in the next few years that we will be focusing on that and if McCain is president he will know that he needs the conservatives in his coalition to fight that battle so he will temper his other urges.

Adults know that sometimes you have to decide between several very bad options, but you do it because it is the right thing to do.

To have so many of you ridiculing him and calling him names (ass clown, idiot, cretin) simply because he supports a candidate you don’t like is shameful and confirms what I’ve been thinking for some time. It’s become personal and that the nativist branch of the party are are as deranged as the far left of the democrats.

Patrick H on January 30, 2008 at 11:20 PM

Wow! McCain’s supporters sound just like… McCain! Smarmy and condescending to those on their right. What a very pleasant quality. I wonder why all those “nativists” haven’t fallen in love with him?

Can’t we agree that if our favorite guy doesn’t get elected, our second choice is OK?

If the party trotted out Terri Schiavo as our nominee it would not be ok just because she had a damn R next to her name.

Everyone here condemning the majority of your party as nativists, haters, cryptoliberals, and idiots ought to remember that perhaps some people have, you know, principles that transcend the party. And “Obamillary is teh Devil!!” is not enough to get people to support for a crotchety old backstabber like McCain “for the party”. Some people can’t cast a vote for Stalin against Hitler knowing later that they voted for Stalin. And why should they? The evil ally of convenience, as in Stalin’s case, often ends up being many times worse.

I think it is actually a very good thing that this many people are not simply mindless tribal Republicans.

AAAAAAaaaaayyyyyy !