You have got to be kidding. In a few more years, that man won’t be able to control his own bowels let alone the country.
leanright on February 6, 2008 at 8:26 AM

And now I would like to poke out my mind’s eye.

Bob Dole was/is a good man. John McCain is no Bob Dole.

spmat on February 6, 2008 at 11:00 AM

I second that…

Bob Dole was/is a good man. John McCain is no Bob Dole.

What it portends is the entitlement age. The country is looking the government for answers/help. There is a refusal to look at oneself in the equation. He was ready. The welfare state wasn’t ready. They’re not interested in learning how to succeed on their own merit. They’re looking on how they can get something for nothing.

After last night’s disappointing showing in California, the Romney camp will have to determine what to do next. According to Amanda Carpenter at Townhall, the Romney camp will have “frank……

A retreat before victory is assured in Iraq cannot be undone in 2012. And mandatory, single-payer, universal health care, once established, will not EVER go away either.

I am not impugning anyone’s motives. I believe I have a reasonable understanding of principled behavior. But if your goal is to see the country punished because—

You can stop right there. If your goal is to see America punished, and her people open to attack and/or ruined financially in order to prove a point for any reason, then you do not deserve politial power nor are you likely to achieve it. A party is a compact. It is, essentially, a pleage of mutual support. As a matter of fact, it’s nothing more or less than a promise.

A political party is a series of personal compromises in order to achieve a goal unattainable by the perfect political party: one’s own self. If McCain is the legal and lawfully selected nominee, and Republicans decide to walk away from their party in droves, what makes them think they will be able to count on those who, you know, actually went out and voted Republican either joyfully or through clenched teeth, in order to prevent The Deluge?

If your idea of any political party is one that means unlimited support for your personal values if your candidate is ascendant, while you in turn owe none to those you dislike or even disdain, you might be in for a surprise in future elections.

Speaking as a FredHead myself, I am bitterly disappointed that I did not even have the chance to vote for a man I admired, and am more distraught still to find myself in the position I now occupy. I see many, many worrisome things about John McCain, but being tough on terror and spending are not among them. We could do worse. Two names come to mind immediately.

Much is said about principles, and since I am not able elect anyone BY MYSELF I have entered into this pact with the group of people who I feel most comfortable with in terms of values. If they, as a body, choose a candidate who is not my first, second, third or fourth choice, then I can look to the Democrats. There I find views so antithetical to everything I believe that I realize there is indeed something to this idea of party loyalty.

And I cannot help but think that such a kind and practical man as Ronald Reagan would be amazed that his name was being invoked so frequently in order to insure that the most liberal, socialist, power-hungry statist in my living memory is elected. I’m glad he’s not here to see this because if he knew the consequences of what was being done in his name, I believe it would kill the man.

Bill Whittle

No it is not worth doing! How any Repub can vote for a man who flirted with joining the dems, considered being their VP, wants 20 million new dems overnight, calls Repubs who don’t support McShamnesty racists and flips the finger to the party on a regular basis is way beyond me. If you want to bend over for that backstabber, good for you. I will under no circumstances vote for a man like that.

jwp1964 on February 6, 2008 at 9:10 AM

Ditto. The Repubs will get EXACTLY what they have asked for come Nov. Refusing to get behind a conservative, from the very beginning, and we has a couple to choose from, and sticking by him to create a ground swell that would have crushed McCain, instead they were fickle and will wind up with a dim in the whitehouse. Hillary/Obama/McCain. Take your pick. Personally I think it will be Hillary because when McCain gets the nod, the tear down will begin.ie MSM, etc.

Romney is for ethanol subsidies (at least in Iowa) and for federal bailouts for Michigan (at least in Michigan) and for expansion of Medicare (at least in Florida). He supports the assault weapons ban on NBC with Tim Russert in December, but opposes it when speaking with instapundit in January.

He was 100% for gay marriage in 2002, but opposes it now? His Mittcare pays for abortions for poor women.

I’ll vote for Romney if he is the candidate in the general election, but I ain’t buying the argument that he’s a strong issues oriented conservative.

Laura Ingraham refuses to back down.
“My views aren’t based on the polls.”

McCain only reaches left. Good luck building a coalition.

The Mormon candidate lost. Get over it.

packsoldier on February 6, 2008 at 8:53 AM

The principled candidate lost. I refuse to get over it.

The Electoral College is embodied in the Constitution in Article 2, Section 1, and in the 12th Amendment.

You’ve successfully listed all of the left-leaning Republican and liberal talking points! Great job!!! Do us all a favor and defect to the Green party. Rush has 12 million listeners, Mark Levin has like 4 million and Sean Hannity/Glenn Beck have numbers between the two. Put down the New York Times and go have your lobotomy finished.

DEATH OF CONSERVATIVE TALK RADIO.

The big halo these so-called “pundits” had on their heads, collapsed. Rushing to Romney for help when it’s too late, when he was there all the time from the very beginning, proves only one thing:

CONSERVATIVE TALK RADIO IS FULL OF HOT AIR!!

Indy Conservative on February 6, 2008 at 1:20 AM

Levinite on February 6, 2008 at 2:21 AM

If I don’t agree with you and the like, then I’m a liberal…OK.

Anyway, where were these 12 and 4 millions you’re talking about at the polling places yesterday?

Obviously none of them were listening, or maybe they were listening without listening, if you know what I mean. So much for talk radio!

You think these practices are literally in the Constitution?
Our Republic does not stand or fall based upon delegates, delegations, or the electoral college for that matter.

maverick muse on February 6, 2008 at 9:21 AM

The electoral college is literally in the constitution. Yes, I think the Republic does stand or fall on it. Do you think this would be the same country if we went with popular voye? Do you think this would be the same country without small states (where real Americans live, work) having equal representation in the Senate…our framers were geniuses (contrary to what school children hear everyday).

You think these practices are literally in the Constitution?
Our Republic does not stand or fall based upon delegates, delegations, or the electoral college for that matter.

I’ll write-in Romney.

profitsbeard on February 6, 2008 at 9:16 AM

I’ll vote dem…I want the next 8 years hung on them…not Repubs through McShamnesty!

It’s 1996 in America again!

Except for the extra 20 million illegals / future Democratic voters.

At least they’re non-Mormons!

Vote Republican for Congress.

Hillary & Obama are open opponents.

McCain, a liar in R’s clothing.

I’ll write-in Romney.

Also, the time has come to eliminate the antiquated practical need for delegates to travel and cast promisory votes on behalf of farmers and frontiersmen, themselves unable to travel to the polling booth. Obviously, delegates today inhibit the voice of the people.

maverick muse on February 6, 2008 at 9:13 AM

I guess you want to get rid of the electoral college as well? This is a REPUBLIC! Going to direct democracy will ensure that the left and east coast control this country…representative democracy is sheer genius!

Liberal justices for courts? Check
Amnesty? Check
Porous borders? Check
Higher taxes? Check
Bigger government? Check

For one, winner take all opposes responsibility to represent the voter, prefering the enabling of the corrupt political fix.

Also, the time has come to eliminate the antiquated practical need for delegates to travel and cast promisory votes on behalf of farmers and frontiersmen, themselves unable to travel to the polling booth. Obviously, delegates today inhibit the voice of the people.