Tired of “everybody hates Mitt” stories? How about an “everybody hates McCain” story?
posted at 11:22 am on February 4, 2008 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
From today’s Washington Post. Unlike anti-Mitt stories, this one isn’t based on class warfare. Its central theme is that John McCain is a hothead who yells at and kneecaps fellow Republicans. His chief of staff’s defense?
[Mark] Salter scoffed at the idea that McCain is not fit to be president and said most stories about his temper are “wildly exaggerated.” He pointed to McCain’s success at “across-the-aisle cooperation” with Democrats as an example of how he would deal with Congress if elected president.
Yeah, like McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy, a pair of legislative abominations. If that’s how a President McCain would “deal with Congress,” no thanks. But the McCain camp’s instinctive defense here is interesting. Instead of always touting McCain’s recording of working with liberals, which we all know he can do, how about Salter or someone else in McCain’s camp giving us some evidence that McCain can work with conservatives?
There isn’t much of that, at least in the last few years. But there’s this.
McCain’s relationship with House Republicans has been strained for years. After stumping for more than 50 GOP candidates during the 2000 campaign, McCain dramatically scaled back his efforts in 2002 out of pique toward House Republicans who opposed his effort to overhaul campaign finance law.
Great. McCain sacrificed the GOP congress over his wretched CFR crusade. Speaker Pelosi thanks you, Maverick.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Why don’t you just deny it happened? For the record.
a capella on February 4, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I HATE McCain. I HATE the idea of him as president.
I am Metro and I approve this hateful message.
Metro on February 4, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I thought that was pretty much every story posted on this site in the last week or so.
Vyce on February 4, 2008 at 12:50 PM
HA Mitt Supporters Facts: “Shamnesty, Keating 5, Bad Temper, RINO, Wanted to be Kerry’s VP, McCain is a traitor”
Move On.Org facts: “Abu Graib, Katrina, Blackwater, NO BLOOD FOR OIL, Republican’s are racists, Petreus is a traitor”
Sad that so many conservatives, can’t make any better argument than Moveon.org
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 12:50 PM
It is not up to me to prove it did not happen. It is up to the people making the accusationto prove it did.
No one has offered proof other than the word of Democrats.
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Do you think that revelation will be persuasive to the Pro-Tanc then Pro-Fred then Pro-Dunc then Pro-Fred then Pro-Mittites? Methinks, sadly, no.
Vizzini on February 4, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Those were not lies, but they did ignore context. What McCain does is lie.
Get a dictionary.
csdeven on February 4, 2008 at 12:51 PM
You’re a hatefully hating hater!
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Really? Was there a Clinton-Feingold, or Clinton-Kennedy bill nobody told me about?
Nah. McCain would be worse than Hillary. I’d rather see the Republicans in Congress fighting against Hillary than being led by the nose by the Gang of Seven, while they help the Democrats draft bills for McCain’s rubber stamp.
logis on February 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Heh Well I dont mind McCain reaching across the isle its when he does a reach around I start to worry.
William Amos on February 4, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Actually, I think many conservatives take them much more seriously than we take most of the Republican politicians.
Jaibones on February 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Says you. You are as big a liar as you say Mitt is.
csdeven on February 4, 2008 at 12:55 PM
I must have missed the “hate-Romney” stuff. Some people aren’t overly fond of him, but that’s more than balanced out by all the salivating over him — and anti-McCain ranting — from MM, NRO, Coulter, and the like.
Just heard a Romney radio spot (in CA) slapping McCain around for his beliefs. Will have to take notes when it plays again, but my initial take was that it follows the Dem playbook of insinuation.
Hillary and Barack Hussein must be rubbing their hands with glee. They’ve got this election in the bag.
MrScribbler on February 4, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Yeah but if McCain or Clinton win then the congree has a willing ally. There is something to be said for gridlock in congress. Its harder for them to make stupid laws and spend OUR money!
RedLizard64 on February 4, 2008 at 12:58 PM
I’m not asking you to prove anything. I just want you to deny it happened. If you are unable to do that, it means you aren’t sure. Just yes, it happened, or no, it didn’t. If no, then we’ll see.
a capella on February 4, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Only thing that kept McCain from throwing in with Kerry in 2004 was his unease that if the scheme didn’t work, it would lead to his forever banishment from any further consideration for higher office.
Everything in John McCain’s life has been about HIM, not the Republican party, he’s proved that time and again.
When McCain loses to Obama in November, he’ll go back to the senate and start his usual disgruntled attitude once again. His frustrations will be tantamount to a madman’s.
Reagan foot soldier, true conservative, what a bunch of crap.
gunter on February 4, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Moveon lies about everything and we don’t have to lie about McLiar.
Wise up.
csdeven on February 4, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Saw Tammy on Fox this morning too and yeah she was almost funny claiming Romney was CONSERVATIVE but the big story there was the DEMOCRATIC strategist claiming that all the DEMs were oh sooooooo scared of McCain. What I can’t imagine is that some wanna be conservatives are so brain dead that they would listen to a DEM mouthpiece and believe him. If anything he is telling us that the DEMs are absolutely not afraid of McCain! Personally I’m aware that none of the remaining Republicans are conservative but at least you can classify Romney as a real Republican and not a full fledged RINO. I can vote for Romney if only to vote against McCain.
Buzzy on February 4, 2008 at 1:00 PM
If the people making the allegation cannot prove it, then it is irrelevent. Period.
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 1:03 PM
Moveon.org also believes that they are telling the “truth”.
You are no less deluded than they are.
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 1:04 PM
I saw her this morning as well and was totally disappointed by her inability to articulate a non emotional argument against Mac.
She was a very unpersuasive supporter of the Romney machine.
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Mitt Romney has not spent his life in public service going around knocking conservatism. And he served in Massachusetts! John McCain is from Arizona. What’s his excuse?
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
I’ll mark that down as an unsure.
a capella on February 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
I have moved over to the Mitt column also..but you are much more gentle with Mitt than you ever were with FRED…By the way what do you think of Mitt if heasks Fred to be his VP?
RedLizard64 on February 4, 2008 at 1:06 PM
ABC’s CHARLES GIBSON: “But, let me, let me, let me imagine it. If he asked you, if he came across the aisle and asked you, would you even entertain the idea? Or will you rule it out for good and all and ever right now?”
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: “John Kerry is a very close friend of mine. We’ve been friends for years. Obviously, I would entertain it.”
ABC’s “Good Morning America,” 3/10/04
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 1:08 PM
Bad link. Here’s the Correct link
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Your “facts” are lies. It’s clear to anyone that doesn’t have their head up their ass.
csdeven on February 4, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Mitt will lose tomorrow AND won’t get a majority of the self-described “conservative” vote. Guaranteed.
Vizzini on February 4, 2008 at 1:10 PM
McCain seems to seek the political water level, During the Reagan administration he was an 80% Conservative, during Clinton/Bush and the rise of neocons, he’s been much less a Conservative.
If McCain is that malleable, thats not acceptable for a POTUS.
Speakup on February 4, 2008 at 1:12 PM
I’ve never been a big fan of CSdeven but your rebuttles are a little lacking in significance..Romney is clearly taken out of context when he is quoted by the McCain Cmpaign and McCain himself just like in the last debate concerning “timetables” Frankly if Romney HAD said amnesty it would have been the truth I am surprised that you have not noticed that Romney is much more of a gentleman when confronting hi opponents than McCain ever could be,
RedLizard64 on February 4, 2008 at 1:12 PM
Bingo!
Buy Danish on February 4, 2008 at 1:12 PM
Welp.
Whether you all like it or not.
John McCain is the Republican nominee.
Tomorrow will confirm that for even the most reticent of you.
I will be archiving many of the posts the born again Romney fans have been making this week, for later cut and paste ridicule. :)
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 1:16 PM
There has as yet been little indication that immigration – that is, a hard-line immigration hawk position – amounts to very much of an advantage even within the GOP, much less nationally. Opinion polls may show wide support for relatively hard-line positions, at least when framed within the context of law enforcement or border security, but when framed as an effectively anti-Hispanic regime, harming both legals and illegals, it turns into a demographic weapon of mass destruction aimed directly at the conservative movement.
Even if Republicans are somehow successful in establishing a hard-line, Tancredo-ist or even Trancredo-ish approach – a possibility for which no one I’ve seen has adduced any evidence – then that holds out at best the image of a temporary victory, likely to be followed by an epochal political disaster on the national level akin to what transpired for the California GOP after their “popular” success passing Proposition 187.
If you don’t think Hillary, Obama, and all their fine friends know exactly how to exploit the politics of immigration, then you haven’t been watching very closely. Otherwise, you would see the drool dripping from their maws whenever the topic comes up. Obama is a little weaker – thus his late embrace of the driver’s license for illegals position – and would give a “reasonable” Republican a chance at carving some ethno-political inroads.
I’ll now expect someone to accuse me of being a traitorous pragmatist. Even if I was an immigration alarmist like some here, my reply would still be that an unwillingness to face the facts is the trademark of fanatical losers, not of a political majority in waiting.
CK MacLeod on February 4, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Thought: Maybe Bush isn’t a Reagan conservative… and it’s the party that moved away from McCain, and not McCain from the party…
Vizzini on February 4, 2008 at 1:18 PM
He may well be. But he will NEVER be the Conservative’s nominee.
I will be archiving many of the posts the born again Romney fans have been making this week, for later cut and paste ridicule. :)
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 1:16 PM
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 1:19 PM
meant to:
And we’ll be here to let your ridicule run off like water off a duck, and figure out how to preserve Conservatism in the years to come.
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 1:21 PM
Try to keep up, dude:
WOT = BOR-ing.
John from WuzzaDem on February 4, 2008 at 1:22 PM
Heh. Timing is everything. Thanks.
It must be difficult to support a candidate and be unsure of his party affiliation or motives. I anticipate an abrupt diversion attempt.
a capella on February 4, 2008 at 1:25 PM
*eyeroll*
Vizzini on February 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Both.
Bush is not a Reagan Conservative and McCain took the neocon hint and ran left.
Who doesn’t think the RNC has been RINOized?
Speakup on February 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM
*duck’s back*
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 1:28 PM
Five-Points Beginner’s Guide To Endorsing And Voting For A Republican Presidential Candidate, Intented For Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Other Talk Radio Hosts and other “Pundits,” Brought To You By A Regular Citizen :
1 – Examine the RECORD, not the image.
2 – Examine the RECORD, not the image.
3 – Examine the RECORD, not the image.
4 – Examine the RECORD, not the image.
5 – Examine the RECORD, not the image.
Therefore, based on the above five criteria, this humble, “uninformed” citizen voted for Mitt Romney on February 14th, 2008 (the first day of early voting in Florida).
Romney was there all the time, but ignored by the “elites.”
Now the “pundits elites” are rushing to Romney for the rescue.
Let’s hope it’s not too late, though I’m not holding my breath.
Who will bear the burden of having McCain in the White House, if he makes it?
You know the answer now.
Indy Conservative on February 4, 2008 at 1:32 PM
McCain sucks…he sucks….. damn he sucks. A year ago I wouldn’t have thought of voting Romeny… tomorrow I’ll pull his lever in the booth……. wait a minute, I didn’t mean ….. geezzz.
Ernest on February 4, 2008 at 1:38 PM
Oh, didn’t I tell you that I’m an “uninformed citizen”.. Correction to the above comment: January 14th , not February..
Indy Conservative on February 4, 2008 at 1:40 PM
Anybody listening to Rush? He just came as close as he ever will f endorsing Romney. Subject: “3 legs of the conservative stool”. Rush says Romney is the only one that has all 3.
kcd on February 4, 2008 at 1:41 PM
One can only hope that Mitt (IF he gets the nomination) can frame the debate for what it is – Hillary/Obama’s support for McCain’s plan to reward illegal behavior with the ill-gotten goods (residency and right to work) versus fair and just law enforcement, with gradual attrition.
I have been writing to Bush since early 2001 suggesting that he can do this and cover his political backside, if he needs to, with a simultaneous reward for legal behavior by temporarily increasing the legal quota from Mexico for a few years. But no “amnesty”, no benefits, no rewards of any sort to those who break our laws.
Last Summer the capitol switchboard was shut down, admittedly by a vocal minority of the electorate, but reflective of the majority by this Zogby poll. Both Dems and Reps rejected Shamnesty overwhelmingly. The key is to frame the debate clearly:
rewarding illegal behavior versus enforcing the law and rewarding immigrants who respect our laws.
Mitt has to use the examples of the states successfully doing exactly this, out of frustration with Congress’s inaction to solve the problem.
fred5678 on February 4, 2008 at 1:44 PM
John McCain’s America
brtex on February 4, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Hmmmm…Interesting. Wonder if we will see that in any ads soon?
kcd on February 4, 2008 at 1:52 PM
Hey, that’s not creepy!
fourstringfuror on February 4, 2008 at 1:53 PM
Do you know the difference in fact and fiction?
kcd on February 4, 2008 at 1:54 PM
In that case you failed every one of your 5 points. Mitt Con-mey is probably the candidate who relies most on the ‘image’ created by the hardline demagogues, and NOT on his Record! Let’s examine his RECORD: pro-immigration, pro-abortion and likes stealth taxes! I’m amazed at how gullible people are to be fooled by the nonsense surrounding Romney, spooled out by charlatans like Limbaugh and Coulter who are so fickle that they would prefer to campaign for Democratic hegemony and the Clintons than the GOP nominee.
Great JayHaw – please do! Much of the nonsense spouted on this site these past couple of weeks deserves ridicule. The bottom line is this: McCain is far more likely to beat Obama and Clinton than any of the other remaining GOP candidates. Romney is completely unconvincing to independents, without whom you cannot win the general. Period.
And for those spitting poison, Bill Kristol is absolutely on target today in showing why we all owe McCain.
Pax americana on February 4, 2008 at 1:57 PM
You do that. If Romney does nothing else but continue to pick up delegates at the current rate it WILL force a brokered convention..And if Mitt asks Hunter/Thompson et al to be his running mate…yoou can bet that McCain will be snookered twice in the last three presidential elections!
RedLizard64 on February 4, 2008 at 1:58 PM
I don’t think you’re watching the same election.
Vizzini on February 4, 2008 at 2:01 PM
Torpedo.
RushBaby on February 4, 2008 at 2:02 PM
Proposition 187. Passed overwhelmingly. Pretty much destroyed the California GOP. Google it. And check the Philly Inquirer article on Latino voters currently in the HotAir headline section.
As I said, I doubt very strongly that hard-line immigration hawk legislation would pass anytime soon, given the political lay of the land. Even if it somehow did, most voters would move on to other issues they care about more, while the legislation was frittered away and effectively overturned in implementation (see Border Fence, and again Prop 187). Latinos, however, would remember. Currently, IIRC, Latinos vote for Dems around 60 – 40, down from 55 – 45. When they start voting for Dems by 75 – 25 or at African American levels, you can kiss EVERY element of the conservative agenda good-bye for the rest of your life.
By the middle of the next decade, if not sooner, the pressure for the “amnesty” path of least resistance would build again. The remnants of the once great and relevant conservative movement would have little chance to stop it.
CK MacLeod on February 4, 2008 at 2:03 PM
Facts can be such uncomfortable things at times, can’t they? I wonder where JeeHaw HeeHaw went.
a capella on February 4, 2008 at 2:06 PM
You know if Mitt does pull this out I will enthusastically vote for him in November and urge all republicans to rally around him. I have problems with either Mitt or McCain.
Just would watch em…
William Amos on February 4, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Talking about “image” while linking to Fred Thompson? It says it all!
Romney, in my view, according to his record, is the most suitable candidate for the presidency -from both parties. I voted for him on January 14th and I don’t regret it.
And please, leave the “pundits” alone, don’t pick on them. They are having fun in their ivory tower.
Indy Conservative on February 4, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Romney supporters fighting with McCain supporters. How cute.
Earth to both camps: neither one of your guys is a conservative.
2Brave2Bscared on February 4, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Probably went to dig up some more of his “facts”…sarc
kcd on February 4, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Ech. We really, really need Hillary to hold it together for just a couple of more weeks. C’mon girl.
funky chicken on February 4, 2008 at 2:13 PM
Actually, I am trying to slip a little work in between my BLOG comments.
Sorry, about that. :)
Now to address your comment, I looked through all the posts made by Romney posters and have not seen a fact yet. What are you referring to?
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 2:14 PM
My thinking is along this line. I have a feeling I’m going to be getting to know the staffs of my Congressman and Senators very well.
KelliD on February 4, 2008 at 2:17 PM
Good greif where was all of these conservatives months ago ? Rush and all the other sat on the sidelines while the republican party’s feild narrowed. They could have attacked McCain then instead of waiting till the last moment.
This is what conservatives get for attacking Fred for having no “fire in the belly”
Well compared to the fire conservatives now have in their bellies maybe the problem was never Fred ?
William Amos on February 4, 2008 at 2:18 PM
What I’m referring to has nothing to do with Mitt.
FACT:HA Mitt Supporters Facts: “Shamnesty, Keating 5, Bad Temper, RINO, Wanted to be Kerry’s VP, McCain is a traitor”
FICTION:Move On.Org facts: “Abu Graib, Katrina, Blackwater, NO BLOOD FOR OIL, Republican’s are racists, Petreus is a traitor”
kcd on February 4, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Please forgive me.
I understand that when I am explaining things to Romney supporters, more detail is required.
My point was that Romney supporters attack John McCain with emotional slogans that they call facts. this is the same thing that Moveon.Org does.
OK. Do you get it now?
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 2:31 PM
They were busy complaining that they had no conservative candidate, just before they started claiming that Romney was the only conservative candidate left. You know, the stalwart Pro-Tanc-Dunc-Fred-Mitt camp.
Vizzini on February 4, 2008 at 2:34 PM
William Amos gets it.
The so-called “pundits” held back when we had trustworthy candidates — Tancredo, Hunter, Thompson — and dissed them for being too obscure or not having “the fire in the belly.”
Who the hell did they push for?
Just came back from MM’s blog and she’s reviving all her McCain venom yet again, with all the usual suspects (Kennedy, Juan the Mexican, etc).
Wish she had used even a fraction of that energy to support someone worthwhile when we had a real choice.
Sames goes for Limbaugh, Coulter and all the rest.
You guys blew it.
MrScribbler on February 4, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Yet another endorsement by a good democrat.
Yeah, Hillary over McCain any day. She’s got a bigger set of balls declaring wage garnishment before the election (much less the nomination).
Remember the lurch to Reagan after Carter? I do. I voted for wrong one in ‘76. Never again.
Tough love, babe. Ann Coulter is right…as usual.
mksmithwriter on February 4, 2008 at 2:39 PM
How did we blow it? The press only allowed certain people to be shown – no one knew those guys were out there, or believed in the marginilization tactics of the press.
Blame the press, as usual.
mksmithwriter on February 4, 2008 at 2:41 PM
What a stinky wad of BS. Dude, there’s a difference between hyperbole and fact!
Get it? Got it? Good!
mksmithwriter on February 4, 2008 at 2:42 PM
I am familiar with how the will of the people was thwarted by the administrative and judicial branches of the California government.
I am also familiar with the recent demonstration of the will of the people (huge majorities in legislatures and at least two Democrat governors) in passing strict law enforcement legislation at the state level. And the continuing trend.
And check that 40% of Hispanics rejected McCain’s amnesty bill.
It passed in the House in December, 2005, but was scuttled by a shrewd Democrat poison pill strategy.
Bush, McCain, and Kennedy were the problem at the Senate level.
So you advocate giving in to law-breakers to retain control? That sounds so Clintonian. I prefer to stand (and possibly fail) on principles. I suggest you don’t give up so easily.
It is wrong and condescending to assume that law-respecting Hispanic citizens are a small minority. Zogby tells a different story.
McCain or any Dem is guaranteed to kiss our entire country goodbye with instant amnesty for 12 to 30 million illegals, with another 30 million right behind. If, as you say, they will vote Democrat, why bother?
I just hate to help to kiss our country goodbye by voting for McCain or any Dem, each of whom would help guarantee a swift demise. I prefer not to reward up to 30 million illegals with their ill-gotten goods while destroying our country. I don’t want more of THIS. And that is exactly what yet one more amnesty (we have had 7 since 1986) will encourage. No thanks. I refuse to be complicit.
fred5678 on February 4, 2008 at 2:52 PM
McCain will NOT be the nominee Wednesday morning. He may well be on his way, but he won’t have it sown up, there just aren’t enough delegates. At least half California’s delegates will go to Romney. With Utah, Mass., Colorado and a few smaller states and some chance of Tenn. and Georgia upsets it will still be a long road to the nomination, but with the advantage on McCain’s side. The chance of stopping McCain is small, but it’s nowhere close to zero.
Igor R. on February 4, 2008 at 2:57 PM
There is NO chance of supporting McCain…unless it’s out the door.
mksmithwriter on February 4, 2008 at 3:01 PM
It will take ten Bill Clintons to feel the country’s pain (bite lower lip) if McCain gets a hold of the White House.
Simple and easy-I’m witt Mitt. Get on board, little children.
Doug on February 4, 2008 at 3:13 PM
Supporting by who? Obviously quite a few misguided people are supporting him. I’ve ranted and raved on many other blogs, some liberal about this piece of scum named McCain but he seems to be liked by many on some sort of a visceral level, totally foreign to me. The first time I noticed it was when he did almost as well as Fred in Iowa. That didn’t make any sense because he hadn’t really campaigned there, is against ethanol subsidies, and there is no military vote in Iowa. In NH many of the liberals who voted for him were anti-war. So he is the illogical candidate and attracts illogical people and Hispanics. But clearly there are enought of those two types in the US today.
Igor R. on February 4, 2008 at 3:16 PM
What garbage! McCain is committed to securing the borders, so where are these 30 million right behind coming from? The fact that Romney’s record is no better proves my suspicion about these rants being just McCain-hate rather than any rational assessment of the situation.
The voters are tired of the demagoguery and negative campaigning of the McCain-haters – I know several conservatives who have joined Mac because of their disgust at the negativity of the charalatan ‘pundits’ now helping the Democrats, who seem to care nothing for surrender in Iraq, obscene pork barrel spending in Congress, socialised health care, socially liberal Supreme Court nominees etc. What a bunch of jackasses.
Fortunately, the voters seem to know better.
Pax americana on February 4, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Uh-huh. The fact that any significant number of citizens would respond that law-breaking should be forgiven already tells you where the emotions and interests on the issue really lie. Or do you believe that Latinos, unlike every other ethnic political constituency in history, would stand on principle rather than see their political and power and influence multiplied?
Even if I accepted the numbers given by immigration hawks for actual and potential new citizens/voters under immediate and future amnesties, the realistic political question would remain whether I prefer to see the huge and already growing voting bloc on the other side for the rest of my life. THAT would be the only result that might truly approach “giving away the country.” The idea that giving ca. 10 million long-time residents a path to citizenship is the Fall of the US, and necessarily means the importation of another 30 million (or however many), is pure alarmism and demagoguery, in my opinion. If it’s not, then “McShamnesty” + tightened security might be about the last, best deal you’re ever going to get.
CK MacLeod on February 4, 2008 at 3:16 PM
No matter which side you are on, there’s no denying Mac inspires passions.
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM
How could anybody hate Mitt? He’s handsome, friendly, rich, and he will tell you whatever you want to hear to gain your support and be your friend.
Seems likable enough.
funky chicken on February 4, 2008 at 3:25 PM
McCain is against ethanol subsidies? THAT RAT BASTARD.
/sarc
funky chicken on February 4, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Did you know McCain voted against the medicare drug plan? Seemed to think it would cost a bunch of money and expand government. What a RINO.
funky chicken on February 4, 2008 at 3:29 PM
a few years ago the “mav” stated that john kerry would make a good president. recently hes said hillary would make a good president. (i heard it in his own voice. unless levin was pulling a hoax.)
check the “mavs” web page and see how many liberal endorsements he has.
mclaim-feingold/kennedy/silky. that alone speaks volumes.
his record does not lie.
then again im a dumb construction worker. surrounded by, most likely, “migrant” workers. who, really, in there heart, believes the mav will secure the border ?
i was for fred. now hoping for mitt as mcain scares the crap out of me. mitt has been a very successful business man and govenor. he has some pretty impressive credentials to me.
washington is afraid of mitt. his statements about cutting all the govt jobs in mass. and how he cant wait to get his hands on washington. they all lose. (copied, posted in wrong spot ealier )
palefaced on February 4, 2008 at 3:31 PM
John McCain paid a compliment to a colleague? He must be satan.
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 4, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Well he might have been possesed maybe if he was talking about Hillary.
William Amos on February 4, 2008 at 3:34 PM
just an example of how he cannot tell the truth. why not say.” no i really think higher taxes and open border and socialized medicine and global warming…………..” fill in the rest.
but the fact is mclaim supports these same ideals. scary. very.
palefaced on February 4, 2008 at 3:36 PM
Mitt Con-mey’s America – on Immigration, on abortion, on stealth taxes.
Face it – Romney is at best a mini McCain, without the patriotism, without the experience, and without the leadership. At least with Mac the GOP gets a chance to win the general, without conceding total control of legislation and Supreme Court nominations to the Democratic party. But then that seems to be exactly what some of the charlatans and pseudo-Republicans, more interested in their egos than in the GOP, seem to want.
President McCain 2008.
Pax americana on February 4, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Color me convinced. How could I have been so ignorant? What was I thinking? From now on, I will gladly bash Senor Maverick McShamnesty (the sorry good for nothing lying creep). I’ll even put a Hillary bumper sticker above the Fred08 one with the American flag on it. Whatever it takes.
myamphibian on February 4, 2008 at 3:44 PM
A couple million ill-informed voters having moved in from out of state since 1982, unfortunately to whom war hero=conservative
sloopy on February 4, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Say, there’s a great bumper sticker idea up in HA headlines from Politico. A little dated, but still pertinant.
a capella on February 4, 2008 at 3:45 PM
There are times to “reach across the aisle.” The devil’s in the details. McCain reaching across the aisle got us:
1. Fewer Constitutional rights with regard to speaking out before an election.
2. An attempt at wholesale no-questions-asked amnesty with allegations that anybody who didn’t agree with McCain-Kennedy is a racist.
3. Flirting with John Kerry to become the VP.
4. Voting against tax relief for working Americans.
5. An completely irrational attack on Secretary Rumsfeld that felt more like McCain seeking revenge than any thoughtful disagreement.
I refuse to support a man whose major “accomplishments” are done in cooperation with a man who wants to impeach the President and a man who besides being the most liberal in the Senate killed a young woman.
highhopes on February 4, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Wow! Anybody that doesn’t support McCain is an egotistic America-hating, charlatan, psuedo-Republican? Who the &*(&^( do you think you are questioning the motives or views of others that way? Just what I’ve come to expect from you mindless McCain syncophants. Like Juan McCain himself, you expect us to just shut up and agree with every single thing you say and do! What an arrogant and moronic attitude that clearly shows the ignorance of McCain’s base!
Romney/Thompson ‘08
highhopes on February 4, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Nice try, shame that like so much of the shrilling round here, it’s based on myth.
But what’s this? McCain has worked with Kerry to improve conditions for American POWs? McCain defended Kerry from the Swift Boat smears in full knowledge that the same bastards were capable of smearing him as a Vietcong collaborator? Obviously a Democrat and an extreme liberal.
Pax americana on February 4, 2008 at 3:56 PM
Man, the McCaininistas have attacked this blog like nobody’s bidness!
Where’s an exorcist when you need one!!!! Is James Woods Available????
mksmithwriter on February 4, 2008 at 4:01 PM
You’ve gotten it: anybody that would campaign for Clinton or Obama (the most liberal Senator in Congress), out of spite for the GOP’s own elected nominee because he doesn’t follow their agenda to the last letter, is, in my book, an egotistic America-hating, charlatan pseudo-Republican. In fact, I think that’s probably too kind.
Pax americana on February 4, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Actually I do get it. The first thing I get from your post is the your personal slight on the Romney supporters. Second, if McCain Fiengold, McCain Kennedy, McCain Leiberman, voting against extending tax cuts because “we need to control spending first”, and I could go on & on, are not facts..what world are you living in?!
kcd on February 4, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Scroll up to RushBaby at 1:09 for the link.
a capella on February 4, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Unforunately Rushbaby’s link is broke so I dont know how accurate that quote is
William Amos on February 4, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Romney has a history of working with the enemy on legislation too. But since Rush says he’s the real principled choice for conservatives, who am I to argue? We sure don’t need to unite the country, that would be horrible for the conservative movement.
myamphibian on February 4, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »