Of course what you said makes conventional sense.

However if McCain loses she gets great exposure as the VP candidate and returns to Alaska. If by a miracle McCain wins she gets four years of exposure as VP plus she keeps McCain in line. She has already walked off one job. That’s why McCain probably won’t pick her.

I suggested Palin primarily for one reason only aside from her bona fides. I think McCain’s only chance of getting the nomination is via his VP pick. He has to placate the age question. We pretend to ignore it but it looms large.

The electorate knows virtually everything about McCain. The VP is the sizzle. As every salesman knows, that’s what you sell, not to mention she would give some conservatives something to look forward to.

But to repeat, putting politics aside I think, first and foremost, she is the best candidate so far.

Nah Gah Dah, baby.

Let the apocalypse begin. I’ve got my bags packed and I’m resolved to us being in the wilderness for 40 days and 40 nights.

See ya ’round the campfire.

On another note he could do a lot worse than picking Sarah Palin as his VP.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp

She certainly is a better choice than I have seen so far. The question is can McCain handle her and would she even want it?

patrick neid on June 6, 2008 at 11:59 AM

Attractive as she is (in several ways), she would be smart to stay in Alaska, let her kids grow up, acquire two gubernatorial terms on her resume, and then think about national office. By then we’ll really need her, too.

McCain: I’m surprised Obama’s not blowing me out

If you keep chasing dems and telling Repubs (not RINOs) to kiss your ass it’ll happen!

She certainly is a better choice than I have seen so far. The question is can McCain handle her and would she even want it?

patrick neid on June 6, 2008 at 11:59 AM

The answer is – not from that old hideous bastard. Not even for a free carbon credit…

Jack Abramoff
Tom DeLay
Bob Ney
Mark Foley
Trent Lott
Bill Frist
Larry Craig

rockmom on June 6, 2008 at 9:38 AM

rockmom (is your ‘nom de net’ for igneous or metamorphic rocks?), how did you put poor old Bill Frist in there in front of Larry Craig (not a very good position to be in, I imagine)?
Strange – there seems to be a certain pornographic theme to this thread…

Attacking Congress would be a good first step. From Kimberley Strassel’s column at the Wall Street Journal,

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121210591693831163.html?mod=Potomac+Watch

“Today’s Congress is ripe for a shredding. The GOP kicked off an era of public disgust with its corruption and loss of principle, a reputation it has yet to shake. Democrats have, impressively, managed to alienate voters further with inaction and broken promises. Congress has come to represent the institutional malaise that so frustrates voters. That distaste explains this year’s appetite for “change.”

As the article indicates there are some Repubs against this. Good. Throw them under the bus as well. Most of the Repub Senate and House are useless. They are the ones, not the Dems, who pissed away a golden opportunity these last 10 years. Pigs all of them at the trough. Obama is part of that crowd as well, led by Clinton with her 3 billion in earmarks. By slamming Congress he tars Obama at the same time with his big spending and taxing resulting in more of the same, this time by Dems with their veto proof majorities. He has to pound the table on fiscal restraint and small government bias. Those are the only essential conservative values that everything else springs from. Under no circumstances can McCain argue minutiae with Obama. People idolize Obama not for what he says but how he says it. While McCain may win on the merits in those discussions people’s eyes will be glaze over. Meanwhile the MSM will castrate McCain with a continual stream of counter factoids allowing Obama to float above it all.

On another note he could do a lot worse than picking Sarah Palin as his VP.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp

She certainly is a better choice than I have seen so far. The question is can McCain handle her and would she even want it?

And when it is all over, I would like to thank you on behalf of my brothers and sisters in Iraq.

You can come over any time, Ill provide the ass kicking…

Squid Shark on June 6, 2008 at 10:05 AM

As much as you would like to believe that it would be MY fault that Obama would pull us out of Iraq, the fact is that I don’t make that choice. Sorry.

Vaporman87 on June 6, 2008 at 9:58 AM

And when it is all over, I would like to thank you on behalf of my brothers and sisters in Iraq.

You can come over any time, Ill provide the ass kicking…

Squid Shark on June 6, 2008 at 9:51 AM

So rich that in great enough numbers it may end up costing McCain the presidency.

Vaporman87 on June 6, 2008 at 9:49 AM

Huckabee is a principled choice?

Thats rich…

rockmom on June 6, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Shhhhh the TC’s would rather put their fingers in their ears and pretend like the Brand is great. If they only started talking about abortion and deportation, America would love us again.

So basically if he loses, it won’t be his fault, it will be the ‘Republican brand’s’ fault. This guy will never take responsibility for anything.

I can’t imagine someone saying that he should be losing by much more. He says ‘I’m the most qualified, but I should be losing by much more’. Can you imagine Obama saying that?

No, Obama will say, ‘Since I’m black and we have a history of racism, and I’m so new, I should not be here, much less leading.’

For McCain it’s all about the Democrats. He MUST get Democrats to vote for him. He certainly doesn’t need the Republicans to vote for him because the brand is so bad. The brand so bad because of McCain. If republicans would stand for smaller government, there wouldn’t be a problem with the brand.

ThackerAgency on June 6, 2008 at 12:04 AM

I was with you until your last statement. The Republican brand was ruined by these people, in this order:

Jack Abramoff
Tom DeLay
Bob Ney
Mark Foley
Trent Lott
Bill Frist
Larry Craig

I suppose you could say it got started with McCain uncovering Jack Abramoff’s rape of the Indian tribes, but that’s as close as you can get to pinning any of this on McCain, and McCain did the party a favor by expopsing that SOB. He has always stood for smaller government and lower spending – it was the rest of the greedy Republicans, led by Tom DeLay and Trent Lott/Bill Frist, who ran spending off the rails, and Geirge Bush who signed all of their massive spending bills. McCain voted against most of them.

Why can’t we edit posts?

Terrye on June 5, 2008 at 11:51 PM

Terrye is right. We resumed the war against Saddam (begun in 1990) in order to “drain the swamp,” as Don Rumsfeld so aptly put it. Thanks to General Patreaus, we are succeeding. And John McCain is right to say we’ll be there for 100 years if necessary. Iraq will remain our forward base in the region for decades to come. If in the process we can midwife Islam out of the 9th century into some semblance of modernity, all the better.

As for Sen. McCain’s courtship of “independents and Reagan Democrats,” he is right to do so, but if he persists in alienating conservatives, he risks driving them to isolationists like Barr. The Senator needs to stop embracing the liberals’ chronic pessimism of economic environmental doom and gloom, and adopt a positive, Reaganesque, “morning in America” program: low taxes, cheap energy, fast growth, an invincible military: The American Century.

‘Reagan Democrats’ didn’t like The Gipper because he imitated the liberals; they liked him because he rejected the ‘malaise’ of Jimmy Carter in favor of avowedly pro-American optimism.

maverick muse on June 6, 2008 at 8:31 AM

I recognize his faults, I choose to approach them differently.

Pehaps it is because of my occupation, which will be affected negatively and dramatically by Obama. Pehaps I am the eternal optimist. I would imagine if I were an Arizonan, I would have a different perspective than you on McCain.

sabbott on June 6, 2008 at 7:54 AM
Django on June 6, 2008 at 3:38 AM

You all are so witty, you sohuld go into comedy

Please be mindful of those who recognize McCain’s faults, having been at the brunt of his mistakes. As a native 5th generation Arizonan, bear along as I express my experience with McCain.

To reiterate: US policy in the 1950s was to capture British and French oil wells (those dastardly colonials) in the 1950s and donate them to the countries in which they were situated, Saudi Arabia and Egypt respectively.

WTF?

You think Eisenhower did that?
You think the USA donated wells to Nassar?
You think the USA used the ’50s to take things away from Britain and France?
How on earth did you figure that?
What do you know of allies and NATO?