b2e4f31525ed646655bc…

Of course, it sounds believable just because it sounds like the sort of things McCain has said before.

So, it’s plausible, but I’m not convinced it’s accurate.

LegendHasIt on March 18, 2008 at 8:26 PM

Agreed.

Valiant on March 18, 2008 at 5:31 PM
INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:34 PM
thatcher on March 18, 2008 at 5:57 PM

Thanks for the input on “Establishment Republicans”.

Seems to me that it is a term that we should avoid using since it is used so equivocally. Given that ‘real’ conservatives are the ones that established and built the Republican Party, the term should be applied to them; But just like the RINOS have hijacked the Republican party, they have also hijacked a term that SHOULD be obviously NOT them.

Of course now that the RINOs have successfully completed their hijacking of the Republican Party, those of us who used to accurately call them RINOs are now the RINOs ourselves.

It is all so confusing.

Just to be clear, from now on, I think I’m going to just stick with using the terms Common Sense Conservatives (without representation), Mediocrats, and leftist loons.

Why run the risk of cramping your hand? Just mark Obama.

NeoconNews.com on March 18, 2008 at 4:55 PM

Why repeat what you did by voting for McCain in the primary? You wanted a media-picked candidate, and you’ll get one in Obama. Republicans nominating McCain assured that.

We all need to settle down and don’t go off half-cocked on things like this. AND McCain and his staff need to suck it up and resist their dangerous little addiction to media attention and “maverickness”.

Now is the time to turn the Dem’s tricks on them… say everything very carefully and thoughtfully. Cool the wisecracks and the off-the-cuff insider leaks that make you feel important, because they could sink your party.

What do we have to hide – not a thing! We simply have to avoid giving the MSM any opening to tell lies about us, which they have proven over and over that they will do without shame. Our opponents, through their own hypocrisy, now find themselves in some of the straights where they usually rely on the media to place us. Be quiet, enjoy their discomfort, and let them keep talking, and dancing.

INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:34 PM

P.S. That’s dead-on. And, like Montezuma’s Revenge, this won’t end well, either.

Maybe they’re a problem because McCain’s drawn the lines in the sand against them every chance he gets.

Am I the only one who doesn’t see how any candidate can win, at this point? Has the time come for the triumph of a third-party? Constitutions? Libertarians? Greens?

Inspired by a drive to get back to the fundamentals of the Republican Party, Senator John Danforth, Lt. Governor Michael Steele, and Governor Christine Todd Whitman created the political organization the Republican Leadership Council, which advocates for the historic Republican principles of liberty, individual responsibility, and personal freedom.

RLC-PAC’s vision is a Republican Party that is unified by the basic tenets of fiscal responsibility and personal freedom, but that allows for diverse opinions on social issues by its members.

LegendHasIt on March 18, 2008 at 5:18 PM

You are correct. Half the people use it to describe conservative Republicans and the other half use it to describe liberal RINOs. I see them as atheist/agnostic blue-blood party dwellers who don’t like Jews, Christians, or conservatives in the party, i. e. Northeastern liberal Republicans and John McCain and his minions. They are only interested in power, prestige, and the economic powers of government (taxes, regulation, etc.)

I know it’s no secret, however, when competing with the Dems for votes I don’t come up with that as the likely context behind the statement.

Also, he spoke of living where he’s is surrounded by those he needs to fight. When I apply Occam’s razor to the topic, it simply sounds as if he doesn’t like the religious right at all, especially when you read the article and the writer gives you these clues. My emphasis below.

The writer states his thesis (mouth gets McCain in trouble) and then backs it up with a couple of minor points before telling you here’s the major reason (religious right is a serious problem). I’ve written numerous things in my life following a similar format.

Here is one prediction: that mouth of his might get the candidate in some trouble.

Yes, it can.

Eagleburger was trying to have fun. He was mocking his fellow panelist Kurtzer, sitting to the left of the others (”where he belongs”), and making noises and funny, impatient faces, while Ann Lewis was speaking. But more importantly, he did not mince his words. In a response to a question about the religious right, an important component of the Republican coalition, he said that it was, indeed “a serious problem,” and reminded his listeners that he now lives in Charlottesville, surrounded by such people that he needs to fight.

Meanwhile, the left is in a froth over McCain accidentally substituting “Al Qaeda” for “the Mahdi Army” in something he said about Iran training jihadis in Iraq. Exit question: Do you really want to play the “words mean things!” game today of all days, nutroots? Really?

I love it when you’re in full righteous snark mode. I’d like to see what you and Mark Levin could come up with if you co-hosted his radio show.

Valiant on March 18, 2008 at 5:09 PM

Could you please plainly and specifically explain what you mean by “Establishment Republicans”?

It is a term I’ve never really paid attention to before.
I googled it, but at a quick glance, it appears to me that half the people that have used it mean it to be the opposite of what the other half mean. I’m confused.

I’m leaving now, but if you can define that for me, I’ll appreciate it later tonight. Thanks.

Meanwhile, the left is in a froth over McCain accidentally substituting “Al Qaeda” for “the Mahdi Army” in something he said about Iran training jihadis in Iraq.

I wish I had the cite handy, but, a few months ago, there were documents discovered in Iraq showing that the Iranians were/are supporting both Shia and Sunni groups, trying to create as much chaos as possible for Tehran to exploit. I think these documents were found when we captured some IRGC officers, but, in any event, Mac wasn’t mistaken.

But why the statement regarding “such people that he needs to fight”?

INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:07 PM

Is he talking about fighting run-of-the-mill Christian Right members? Or is he talking about having to fight the Christian Right leaders around him that may be persuading their congregations not to vote for McCain?

And why would he be talking about Republican turnout to a group that had Obama and Clinton people there?

It’s not exactly a secret strategy that he’s going to have to fight to get the C.R. on his side. That’s like saying,” You know, if Clinton takes the nomination by SDs, we might have to work to get Obama supporters to vote for us.”

McCain’s been trying to woo the Christian Right to his side since the campaign really began. Here’s an article in the Boston Globe back before he was even officially a candidate.

McCain is not the source of the disease, only a swarthy symptom…

Odd. He’s always struck me as being a bit on the pale side.

Valiant on March 18, 2008 at 5:09 PM

This explanation seems more likely than that of concern for turnout.

It’s obvious that he’s referring to that fact that the Jews don’t like the Christian right.
ninjapirate on March 18, 2008 at 4:39 PM

The Christian right is Israel’s best friend. Conservative Jews like Netanyahu know this.