Posted on 02/13/2006 11:07:30 AM PST by areafiftyone
The left keeps pushing McCain's name out there...they want to have one of their people at the top of both tickets.
bttt
[I think actually McCain would be STRONGER on the War on Terror]
If McCain could be so against prisoner questioning, he would be against another Phoenix Program which is what I sure hope is going on right now: secret executions of bad guys happening around the globe and throughout Iraq.
So, no, I see McCain as losing the WOT by not doing what it takes.
This war will be won by the proper exercise of assassinations.
McCain is anathema to me for this reason.
Rudy is another story. He would be OK with a Phoenix Program.
Rudy would have a problem with African Americans, however. They do see Rudy as the father of police brutality. But look how popular Rudy is in the blue states anyway.
To the rest of us he is the backstabbing bass turd that fell in with the group of 14 to cut the nuclear option off.
OH sheesh, get over it. Bush got 5 out of 7 filibustered judges because of the Gang of 14 and avoided a filibuster on Alito as a result as well. It was worth it to go with the Gang of 14's deal at the cost of 2 judges you can't even name and for whom Bush has found I'm certain equally conservative alternative nominees to take their seats instead. Was it REALLY worth the P.R. hit the GOP would have taken over the nuke option? And no matter how much you tried to explain it to Americans, the GOP would have been painted as being bullies by the lapdogs in the media. It simply wasn't worth it to have the GOP take a huge hit and look like power-hungry tyrannts over 2 lousy judges. And in the end it ensures Bush's other nominees sail through including his Supreme Court justices and serves notice to extremist Democrats like Kerry, Hillary and Schumer that you'll get nowhere with a filibuster. It's now off the table and hasn't cost the GOP a thing. You guys REALLY need to get out of this knee-jerk "everything that doesn't match our dogmatic view of the world is bad" mindset. Sometimes things work out for the best despite initially not going in the direction you want.
ROTFLMAO!
Are you posting from McCain's office?
McCain actually agreed with Democrats on calling the Swift Boat Vets liars and he agreed with them on it being supposedly wrong to question animals who need to be executed anyway.
And Bush called the Minutemen "Vigilantes." You know, if we wait around for a candidate whose every utterance passes our conservative smell test, we're never going to have anyone to run. Bush has said things I don't like too, but in the end we support him because on balance he's a good guy who does good things. Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Maybe McCain truly was offended by the Swift Boat guys. Who cares? Is this the most important issue facing the nation today? Hardly.
You keep saying "I want a candidate who can get a 50 state sweep." Forgetting how unlikely that is to happen since not even Reagan achieved it, though he came closer than anyone, there isn't really a big consensus candidate out there who would cause that to happen for the GOP. McCain and Rudy come closest of anyone. And to have that kind of candidate in a nation as polarized as ours, they're going to have to of necessity have taken some stands that run contrary to the GOP's and Bush's. Not everything we do is enormously popular you know. The closest you're going to get to a 50 state sweep is what McCain or Guiliani will deliver. I don't know who else can do it...
All I am saying is that if McCain were on fire, I wouldn't piss him out. I sure as hell won't support him, primary or general. Matter of fact I'd like to see a new FreeRepublic poll, If John McCain were the Republocrat nominee, verses ANY Democrat, would you;
A) Vote McCain
B) Vote Dem
C) Vote Third Party
D) Stay Home and watch the GOP try and win without me.
Vote for McCain,
but I'm a grown up.
"but McCain fits your own description of a poor candidate who cannot do intellectual battle with the liberals. McCain panders to the liberals."
The difference is, McCain comes instantly endowed with credibility with many Americans, particularly indepedents and swing voters. He is teflon. Any attempt to attack him or what he stands for will fall flat on its face with many Americans because he embodies trust to them. Any Democrat attacking him will look bad and lose credibility. Indeed, I think they'll walk very gingerly around McCain for fear of being seen as attacking a war hero. But even if that attack him, doesn't need to refute them point by point because he's a known quantity and Americans trust him. Allen is not. Allen is an unknown who through his inability to defend GOP positions will end up being defined, and thus defeated, by his enemies. Allen simply doesn't have the clout or the trust McCain engendgers among the voters we need to win.
When McCain speaks in favor of the Iraq War, his clout does more than 20 Bush speeches on Iraq to convince Americans we're doing the right thing. I really believe that. I love it when he's on some news program endorsing the war. It has got to make life tough on the Dems. trying to demean our efforts there.
In any event, I think McCain is capable of refuting them and has done so a number of times. We all remember his scorching letter to Obama last week. McCain won't roll over for these people. And when he needs to respond, he'll have a command of the facts to do so.
By the way, thanks for your kind words about my posts.
Vote for McCain,
but I'm a grown up
Just like a pouting child. You're entirely predictable...lol.
So, no, I see McCain as losing the WOT by not doing what it takes.
I really think that's an unsupportable position, I really do. I think McCain will do whatever it takes to win the war. I sure don't think Syria would be getting away with as much as it is under a President McCain. And while I think McCain as a prisoner of war feels empathy for what it is like to be tortured, I don't think he'd give the least damn about offing an Al Qaeda leader as part of this "Phoenix Program" you speak of. I disagree with McCain on the torture front, but can we honestly say Bush is doing everything to win the war on terror with wide open borders and no action taken to punish Syria for its support of Iraqi Al Qaeda terrorists?
His "real record" is shameful.
He's unstable, a meglomaniac, and a media whore....
AND, he obviously shares hotel rooms with Chris Matthews.
Fine. Enjoy President Clinton come 2009. You'll be the first on here bitching about her when it happens and I'll just sit back and say "Told you so. Should have taken half a plate of what you want than a full plate of horse manure from Hillary."
"Rudy would have a problem with African Americans, however. They do see Rudy as the father of police brutality. But look how popular Rudy is in the blue states anyway."
The black vote is a non-issue for the GOP. We don't need it. If we can get it, fine. But let's face it most are too brainwashed. I wouldn't give it another moment's thought. The Hispanic vote on the other hand is more important.
Predictably not for sale, I'll keep my principles and values intact. I won't for someone just because they are the Republican in the race ever again. This has gotten us countless dead in the undeclared border war with Mexico and spending that would make one think a liberal was in the Oval office. Has the man never heard of the word veto?
Good God some people would crawl nekkid over broken glass to vote for Rudy or McCain and damn the consequences.
Not me.
No. And when you speak in favor of Bush are you posting from his office?
No, but then I'm not on a thread trashing everybody except my guy.
You're spending a lot of time trashing George Allen and I wonder why.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.