McCain? What are we…Democrats???
First, I’ll start by channeling Gene and the equally politically astute Bill Mitchell:
If one NFL football team winning a game against another NFL team is a “Miracle ”, then John McCain, who was nearly broke last summer and “hated by everyone” according to BM, then his winning the Republican nomination must be a “Super Miracle”! (Of course, that “analysis” is based on what the meaning of the words “Miracle” and “is” are!)
I will once again establish my bona fides by stating (as I have repeatedly on this forum) that I have never been in favor of McCain winning the nomination and by extension, the presidency. But to paraphrase another commenter, “I dislike McCain, but I really hate the alternative!”
Victor Davis Hanson puts it like this:
But ever since Super Tuesday, what I’ve heard from far too many conservatives is pointless crying, whining, bitching and moaning.
What are we…Democrats???
I’m not saying that we can’t criticize McCain or disagree with his policies, but far too many have gone beyond criticism to character assassination.
Again, what are we…Democrats???
The Wall Street Journal opines:
But, if McCain is elected, they say, how can we ever reform the Republican party into the conservative party we all desire. One bit of reality to consider, is that the votes are in…there appear to be an awful lot of Republicans who are not as conservative as you or I! It’s their party, too! It is still a battle for hearts and minds. Do you think we will win that battle by simply disparaging McCain? (especially if the alternative is to guarantee the election of an avowed leftist? ) Let the argument be for more conservative principle, not a suicide pact for the party!
But, if “principled” conservatives are willing to jeopardize the security and integrity of the country for the sake of “reforming” their party… What do we typically call partisans who put party power above the good of their country? Uh…Democrats!
A lot is being made about McCain’s choice of a vice president. I don’t think we should discount the possibility that McCain could pick a true conservative (or at least one more conservative than he) to bolster his standing within the party and generate more enthusiasm (and funds) for the general election.
One thing to consider is why would McCain make any move towards “true conservatives” if that same group is actively stabbing him in the back and promising to sit out the election or even support his opponents?
Try tempering your criticism with wisdom (or resign yourself to four to eight years of a Clinton co-presidency!)
If we were to have one or two terms of McCain, who will be at least marginally better, (perhaps even surprisingly better) than the Democrat who runs against him this fall, followed by one or two terms of a conservative veep, how could that be any worse than four to eight years of either of the two leftists running disguised as moderates we have before us and fifty years of liberals legislating from the bench after that?
In California, conservatives would sometimes “sit out” an election, if the Senatorial candidate didn’t meet their standards of ideological purity. The thinking was, after the populace saw how terribly they performed, they could be defeated easily in the next election. This thinking spawned a virtually unbroken line of Democrat senators from the cadaverous Alan Cranston to Diane Feinstein to the ditsy Barbara Boxer.
Wow! That worked out well! /sarcasm
It’s a free country (so far). If you vote for Ron Paul, or Ron Reagan or Ron Popeil, you help elect a leftist running as a moderate. If you stay home and sit on your hands because you can’t “hold your nose” and vote for McCain, I hope you can hold your nose for the next half century of liberal “justices” run amok.
Lick your wounds. Mourn for the candidate who might have been. But, don’t give up the fight because you can’t get everything you want all at once. Don’t let MDS (McCain Derangement Syndrome) keep you from doing what’s best for the country.
(And for Bill Mitchell, weeping in his basement, tinfoil hat askew , a little light reading for you:
“Why Romney Failed” by Byron York)
UPDATE: Captain Ed on Bitter Enders:
UPDATE II: Another reason Mitt lost!
And on a lighter note...
Another reason Mitt lost: He couldn't tell a "mitt" from a "glove"!
If one NFL football team winning a game against another NFL team is a “Miracle ”, then John McCain, who was nearly broke last summer and “hated by everyone” according to BM, then his winning the Republican nomination must be a “Super Miracle”! (Of course, that “analysis” is based on what the meaning of the words “Miracle” and “is” are!)
I will once again establish my bona fides by stating (as I have repeatedly on this forum) that I have never been in favor of McCain winning the nomination and by extension, the presidency. But to paraphrase another commenter, “I dislike McCain, but I really hate the alternative!”
Victor Davis Hanson puts it like this:
In this crazy year, the election may finally come down to how many Democrats — scared that they don’t know enough about Obama, or know too much about the Clintons — will vote for a veteran pro like McCain. Or, on the flip side, how many “true” conservatives will stay home in November to ensure that a liberal wins the White House just to prove their purity.
But ever since Super Tuesday, what I’ve heard from far too many conservatives is pointless crying, whining, bitching and moaning.
What are we…Democrats???
I’m not saying that we can’t criticize McCain or disagree with his policies, but far too many have gone beyond criticism to character assassination.
Again, what are we…Democrats???
The Wall Street Journal opines:
On Jan. 20, 2009, six of the nine Supreme Court justices will be over 70. Most of them could be replaced by the next president, particularly if he or she is re-elected. Given the prospect of accelerating gains in modern medical technology, some of the new justices may serve for half a century. Even if a more perfect candidate were somehow elected in 2012, he would not be able to undo the damage, especially to the Supreme Court.
Others are concerned that Mr. McCain was a member of the “Gang of 14,” opposing the attempt to end filibusters of judicial nominations. We believe that Mr. McCain’s views about the institutional dynamics of the Senate are a poor guide to his performance as president. In any event, the agreement of the Gang of 14 had its costs, but it played an important role in ensuring that Samuel Alito faced no Senate filibuster. It also led to the confirmation of Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and Bill Pryor, three of President George W. Bush’s best judicial appointees to the lower federal courts.
But, if McCain is elected, they say, how can we ever reform the Republican party into the conservative party we all desire. One bit of reality to consider, is that the votes are in…there appear to be an awful lot of Republicans who are not as conservative as you or I! It’s their party, too! It is still a battle for hearts and minds. Do you think we will win that battle by simply disparaging McCain? (especially if the alternative is to guarantee the election of an avowed leftist? ) Let the argument be for more conservative principle, not a suicide pact for the party!
But, if “principled” conservatives are willing to jeopardize the security and integrity of the country for the sake of “reforming” their party… What do we typically call partisans who put party power above the good of their country? Uh…Democrats!
A lot is being made about McCain’s choice of a vice president. I don’t think we should discount the possibility that McCain could pick a true conservative (or at least one more conservative than he) to bolster his standing within the party and generate more enthusiasm (and funds) for the general election.
One thing to consider is why would McCain make any move towards “true conservatives” if that same group is actively stabbing him in the back and promising to sit out the election or even support his opponents?
Try tempering your criticism with wisdom (or resign yourself to four to eight years of a Clinton co-presidency!)
If we were to have one or two terms of McCain, who will be at least marginally better, (perhaps even surprisingly better) than the Democrat who runs against him this fall, followed by one or two terms of a conservative veep, how could that be any worse than four to eight years of either of the two leftists running disguised as moderates we have before us and fifty years of liberals legislating from the bench after that?
In California, conservatives would sometimes “sit out” an election, if the Senatorial candidate didn’t meet their standards of ideological purity. The thinking was, after the populace saw how terribly they performed, they could be defeated easily in the next election. This thinking spawned a virtually unbroken line of Democrat senators from the cadaverous Alan Cranston to Diane Feinstein to the ditsy Barbara Boxer.
Wow! That worked out well! /sarcasm
It’s a free country (so far). If you vote for Ron Paul, or Ron Reagan or Ron Popeil, you help elect a leftist running as a moderate. If you stay home and sit on your hands because you can’t “hold your nose” and vote for McCain, I hope you can hold your nose for the next half century of liberal “justices” run amok.
Lick your wounds. Mourn for the candidate who might have been. But, don’t give up the fight because you can’t get everything you want all at once. Don’t let MDS (McCain Derangement Syndrome) keep you from doing what’s best for the country.
(And for Bill Mitchell, weeping in his basement, tinfoil hat askew , a little light reading for you:
“Why Romney Failed” by Byron York)
UPDATE: Captain Ed on Bitter Enders:
UPDATE II: Another reason Mitt lost!
John McCain isn't a perfect candidate; far from it. He's the one who has attracted the most votes from the Republican coalition, though, and the various coalition factions have failed to produce anyone better. Being a bitter ender will take the party to a bitter end. It's time to start working within the McCain team to increase our influence, rather than engage in fantasies about magic candidates and marginalizing the movement.Captain Ed
And on a lighter note...
Top Ten Reasons Mitt Romney Dropped Out Of The Presidential Race
10. Harsh midwest weather was murder on his split ends
9. Wants to devote more time to rap persona P. Mitty
8. Polls show public doesn't want a president who looks like a casino greeter
7. Just couldn't compete with the Ron Paul juggernaut
6. Unveiling a new line of honey-roasted Romnuts
5. That bastard Zogby had it in for him
4. Apparently America is not ready for a white male president
3. No number 3 — writer suffering from Mitt withdrawal
2. There was that little problem of nobody voting for him
1. Lost all of his money betting on the Patriots
-Letterman
Another reason Mitt lost: He couldn't tell a "mitt" from a "glove"!
