“[W]e need to look towards the future rather than staying in the past.”

Quote from the campaign based on and constantly bringing up 1 speech given in 2002.

Even if that happened, chances of Huckabee being the one are…very low. But some of you can dream on.

Entelechy on April 22, 2008 at 1:54 PM

I commented on the prediction and not who would receive the nomination if it happened. I supported Duncan Hunter, but I’m guessing Romney might come out on top.

Seventy two year old males drop dead unexpectedly on a routine basis.

DFCtomm on April 22, 2008 at 12:25 PM

Even if that happened, chances of Huckabee being the one are…very low. But some of you can dream on.

I would like to say, to the conservatives who would rather stay home than vote for McCain, if the Dems win, I hope you enjoy them and their stay in the White House.

4shoes on April 22, 2008 at 10:09 AM

Their point is that they certainly won’t enjoy it and neither will a lot of McCain supporters. This will lead to a unified Republican Party opposing and hopefully stopping a socialist Presidents agenda, whereas if McCain is the president he will work with the Democrats to pass their agenda, just like he always has, and receive the backing of enough Republicans that he will actually get it done.

The fear is that McCain will be far more effective than either of the Democrats at enacting the socialist’s legislation , and Republicans will get the blame and be damaged for years to come.

Is there any doubt that McCain agrees with this?
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children what it was once like in the United States when men were free.”—Ronald Reagan

MrLynn on April 22, 2008 at 8:20 AM

I don’t think for a second that McCain believes that. If he did he wouldn’t have sold us out to the open-borders lobby. The statement above clearly suggests why it is that Reagan later regretted signing that amnesty bill, and it’s a lesson that McCain failed to learn or has chosen to overlook.

Ding!

MadisonConservative on April 22, 2008 at 9:53 AM

Thanks for the encouraging word. Time to resume lurking. : )

John McCain will not be the next President of the United States.

But neither will Clinton or Obama.

Watch. And. See.

Red Pill on April 21, 2008 at 11:21 PM

If you turn out to be right on that prediction Red Pill, I will consider you a prophet.

Maxx on April 21, 2008 at 11:35 PM

It sounds like an amazing prediction, but it’s not really. Seventy two year old males drop dead unexpectedly on a routine basis.

The reason I’m NOT staying home on election day, isn’t because I don’t agree with him 20% of the time.

The reasone I’m NOT staying home is, I don’t agree with his opponents 100% of the time.

In fact, not only do I disagree with them, I believe they are dangerous…Dangerous on the Economic Issues…Dangerous on Foreign Policy Issues…And, Dangerous on National Security Issues.

So, at the end of the day, the 20% that I disagree with McCain doesn’t amount to a BB in a Barrel.

franksalterego on April 22, 2008 at 9:20 AM

Very excellent point! Worth repeating.
I would like to say, to the conservatives who would rather stay home than vote for McCain, if the Dems win, I hope you enjoy them and their stay in the White House.

Time to give the Democrats a whack.
–Angry Dumbo on April 22, 2008 at 9:44 AM

Let’s look at the history of Democrats in war-time.

1862, Jefferson Davis(Democrat): 618,000 dead Americans.
1916, Woodrow Wilson(Democrat): 5,525,000 dead Americans and Allies, plus 4,121,000 missing.
1941, Franklin Roosevelt(Democrat): 14,000,000 dead Americans and Allies.
1952, Truman(Democrat): 48,000 dead Americans.
1961, Kennedy/Johnson(Democrats): 58,000 dead Americans.

I think, Democrats have had more than their fair share of “whacks”

1. A long war against Islamo-facism
2. Huge deficit/national debt/run-away-spending/explosion of “entitlements”
3. Massive migration of illegal aliens which exacerbates #2
4. Energy

I think McCain gets the general idea of the long war. He also basically gets the need to constrain spending. He misses the boat on illegals but seems to be saying the right things in terms of “getting the message.” I’ve not heard enough about his thoughts on energy.

President Obama, a liberal president we can oppose.

President McCain, a Republican president passing ineffective liberal policy and Republicans get the blame.

Easy choice.

Angry Dumbo on April 22, 2008 at 8:19 AM

Ding!

McCain swallowed Al Gore’s global warming hoax proving McCain is too stupid to think critically.

If elected (winning candidates generally don’t accept federal matching funds – so don’t soak your knickers just yet) McCain will be a poll driven President with an R after his name.

Vote for him, just don’t think too hard.

The war against Islamic jihad is going to be a long one. Time to give the Democrats a whack.

On the “Immigration” issue, that’s being overemphasized.

Does anyone, in their right mind, believe you’re gonna’ get a BETTER deal from the Liberal/Democrats?

Any way you look at it, THAT issue is a “push” and reduces the “20%” to 5%.

The reasone I’m NOT staying home is, I don’t agree with his opponents 100% of the time.

In fact, not only do I disagree with them, I believe they are dangerous…Dangerous on the Economic Issues…Dangerous on Foreign Policy Issues…And, Dangerous on National Security Issues.

So, at the end of the day, the 20% that I disagree with McCain doesn’t amount to a BB in a Barrel.

Have you considered the likelihood that it is you who are McCain deranged? Sowell will likely vote for McCain even if he doesn’t like it but that isn’t good enough for you. He has to enthusiastically support McCain just like you or else he is McCain deranged.

That’s deranged.

FloatingRock on April 22, 2008 at 1:12 AM

heh…No, I am not McCain-deranged. And Yes…Sowell says now that he’ll probably vote McCain, but he’s written some pretty scathing pieces calling McCain a “liar”.

To borrow a line of thought from the Moron-in-Chief, if McCain cares so damn much about the fate of the nation, you’d think he’d make some concessions to conservatives. McCain is about one thing. McCain.

Funny how you assume I was in the not voting for McCain camp. I was actually in the yeah, I’ll probably cave and vote for the bastard camp about forty minutes ago. I’m back in when hell freezes over camp right now. See how that works?

doubleplusundead on April 22, 2008 at 1:01 AM

McCain cares bout one thing…America.

And no, I didn’t assume you weren’t voting for McCain…I was just making a point to others.

And I think we conservatives have to get behind McCain—even send him money—for two reasons:

(a) The Long War trumps everything. McCain will defend America; the Democrats won’t.

(b) We have to stop the Marxists from taking over. Obambi and Missus Slick are Marxists. John S. McCain is not.

‘Nuff said.

MrLynn on April 22, 2008 at 8:07 AM

Agreed.

We conservatives deserve every bit of Amsog (American socialism) we will be forced to swallow over the next four years for not nominating him. Every bit.

VolMagic on April 22, 2008 at 1:38 AM

Vol, I wouldn’t be too hard on us conservatives. Real conservatives make up a small voting block of the Republican Party. The majority are moderates. Replace “conservatives” with “Republicans” and I agree 100%.

Suppose we lose in the effort to contain and weaken the terrorists and they bring the fight to our homes and work places. At that point do most of the other issues that do not attempt to keep the terrorists out of this country matter more than a hill of baby beans?

If you assign a serious chance that this event might happen then it may well be more important than other issues such as abortion or the economy. If we win against the terrorists and their attempts to create a worldwide caliphate we can recover from having our economy collapse. We can always worry about abortion later. If we lose against the terrorists do the other problems matter? We’ll have no economy to recover, for example.

{^_^}

John McCain: “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran. . .” (to the tune of “Barbara Ann”).

I think that, given the chance, McCain could live up to the heritage and memory of Ronald Reagan, which (contrary to the Governor of Indiana) we should not forget. Is there any doubt that McCain agrees with this?

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children what it was once like in the United States when men were free.”—Ronald Reagan

President Obama, a liberal president we can oppose.

President McCain, a Republican president passing ineffective liberal policy and Republicans get the blame.

Easy choice.

Reagan picked fights he had a good shot of winning without screwing over a future Republican Congress.
Sekhmet on April 22, 2008 at 1:34 AM

Ronald Reagan didn’t achieve greatness by being a mindless ideologue. He made a handful of concessions, but when he did so, it always helped advance the master plan.

George Bush made concessions frequently, and with no apparent long-term goals in mind. And John McCain is basically George Bush squared.

We keep hearing the McCaniacs try to re-define Ronald Reagan solely in terms of a few concessions he had to make. In the case of immigration for example, what is the ever-so-clever point there? Reagan did something a a quarter of a century ago that turned out worse than expected; ergo it’s OK that John McCain tried to do a whole lot MORE of that now.

What kind of reasoning is that? When you see a pothole that an otherwise outstanding builder left behind, what what do you do:

A) Try to FIX it? Or

B) Jump in and dig as deep and as fast as you possibly can, while you curse the name of the other guy for causing the problem in the first place? …Oh, and while you’re at it, also cuss out that guy’s friends for not grabbing a shovel and helping you?

I know that seems like a really tough choice for a lot of people but it doesn’t have to be. You just need to ask yourself one simple question: What would Reagan do if he were here now?

McCain is NOT going to sign any global warming crapola. . .

JetBoy on April 21, 2008 at 11:51 PM

He has already signed on to some kind of ‘carbon-trading’ scheme with Senator Lieberman.

Does Senator Inhofe have any clout with McCain? He has been heroic at waging a single-handed (in the US Senate) fight against the GW alarmists.

I would like to think that enough of the American public are skeptical of the anthropogenic global warming hysteria that if McCain stood up and denounced it, he’d get an enthusiastic reception—and a lot of votes. I could be wrong, but I don’t have the sense that large numbers of the public have bought into the myth, despite endless Time magazine covers.

In any event, I was impressed with Sen. McCain’s performance on George Stephanopolous’s show (sp?) Sunday. He didn’t mince any words on Obambi’s friendship with the terrorist Ayers.

And I think we conservatives have to get behind McCain—even send him money—for two reasons:

(a) The Long War trumps everything. McCain will defend America; the Democrats won’t.

(b) We have to stop the Marxists from taking over. Obambi and Missus Slick are Marxists. John S. McCain is not.

‘Nuff said.

If, by some cosmic chance, Hillary pulls out the dem. nomination, the BO people will not leave their mud and straw houses for months.

I think we’ll still be OK. McCain was not my 1st or 2nd choise either but Hilllary and BO were definitely ‘last and second to last’.

MB4:Looks like oneupped Indy Conservative in the being
dragged off to vote for McCain!

Rick Santorum is welcome to his opinion, if McCain does win, it will be without my support.