Skip to comments.Rally for Romney: Conservatives need to act now, before it is too late.
Posted on 01/31/2008 10:37:41 AM PST by Delacon
I have spent nearly four decades in the conservative movement from precinct worker to the Reagan White House. I campaigned for Reagan in 1976 and 1980. I served in several top positions during the Reagan administration, including chief of staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese. I have been an active conservative when conservatism was not in high favor.
I remember in 1976, as a 19-year-old in Pennsylvania working the polls for Reagan against the sitting Republican president, Gerald Ford, I was demeaned for supporting a candidate who was said to be an extremist B-actor who couldnt win a general election, and opposing a sitting president. And at the time Reagan wasnt even on the ballot in Pennsylvania because he decided to focus his limited resources on other states. I tried to convince voter after voter to write-in Reagans name on the ballot. In the end, Reagan received about five percent of the Republican vote as a write-in candidate.
Of course, Reagan lost the nomination to Ford by the narrowest of margins. Ford went on to lose to a little-known ex-governor from Georgia, Jimmy Carter. But the Reagan Revolution became stronger, not weaker, as a result. And the rest is history.
I dont pretend to speak for President Reagan or all conservatives. I speak for myself. But I watched the Republican debate last night, which was held at the Reagan library, and I have to say that I fear a McCain candidacy. He would be an exceedingly poor choice as the Republican nominee for president.
Lets get the largely unspoken part of this out the way first. McCain is an intemperate, stubborn individual, much like Hillary Clinton. These are not good qualities to have in a president. As I watched him last night, I could see his personal contempt for Mitt Romney roiling under the surface. And why? Because Romney ran campaign ads that challenged McCains record? Is this the first campaign in which an opponent has run ads questioning another candidates record? Thats par for the course. To the best of my knowledge, Romneys ads have not been personal. He has not even mentioned the Keating-Five to counter McCain's cheap shots. But the same cannot be said of McCains comments about Romney.
Last night McCain, who is the putative frontrunner, resorted to a barrage of personal assaults on Romney that reflect more on the man making them than the target of the attacks. McCain now has a habit of describing Romney as a manager for profit and someone who has laid-off people, implying that Romney is both unpatriotic and uncaring. Moreover, he complains that Romney is using his millions or fortune to underwrite his campaign. This is a crass appeal to class warfare. McCain is extremely wealthy through marriage. Romney has never denigrated McCain for his wealth or the manner in which he acquired it. Evidently Romneys character doesnt let him to cross certain boundaries of decorum and decency, but McCains does. And what of managing for profit? When did free enterprise become evil? This is liberal pablum which, once again, could have been uttered by Hillary Clinton.
And there is the open secret of McCain losing control of his temper and behaving in a highly inappropriate fashion with prominent Republicans, including Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Strom Thurmond, Donald Rumsfeld, Bradley Smith, and a list of others. Does anyone honestly believe that the Clintons or the Democrat party would give McCain a pass on this kind of behavior?
As for McCain the straight-talker, how can anyone explain his abrupt about-face on two of his signature issues: immigration and tax cuts? As everyone knows, McCain led the battle not once but twice against the border-security-first approach to illegal immigration as co-author of the McCain-Kennedy bill. He disparaged the motives of the millions of people who objected to his legislation. He fought all amendments that would limit the general amnesty provisions of the bill. This controversy raged for weeks. Only now he says hes gotten the message. Yet, when asked last night if he would sign the McCain-Kennedy bill as president, he dissembles, arguing that its a hypothetical question. Last Sunday on Meet the Press, he said he would sign the bill. Theres nothing straight about this talk. Now, I understand that politicians tap dance during the course of a campaign, but this was a defining moment for McCain. And another defining moment was his very public opposition to the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. He was the medias favorite Republican in opposition to Bush. At the time his primary reason for opposing the cuts was because they favored the rich (and, by the way, they did not). Now he says he opposed them because they werent accompanied by spending cuts. Thats simply not correct.
Even worse than denying his own record, McCain is flatly lying about Romneys position on Iraq. As has been discussed for nearly a week now, Romney did not support a specific date to withdraw our forces from Iraq. The evidence is irrefutable. And its also irrefutable that McCain is abusing the English language (Romneys statements) the way Bill Clinton did in front of a grand jury. The problem is that once called on it by everyone from the New York Times to me, he obstinately refuses to admit the truth. So, last night, he lied about it again. This isnt open to interpretation. But it does give us a window into who he is.
Of course, its one thing to overlook one or two issues where a candidate seeking the Republican nomination as a conservative might depart from conservative orthodoxy. But in McCains case, adherence is the exception to the rule McCain-Feingold (restrictions on political speech), McCain-Kennedy (amnesty for illegal aliens), McCain-Kennedy-Edwards (trial lawyers bill of rights), McCain-Lieberman (global warming legislation), Gang of 14 (obstructing change to the filibuster rule for judicial nominations), the Bush tax cuts, and so forth. This is a record any liberal Democrat would proudly run on. Are we to overlook this record when selecting a Republican nominee to carry our message in the general election?
But what about his national security record? Its a mixed bag. McCain is rightly credited with being an early voice for changing tactics in Iraq. He was a vocal supporter of the surge, even when many were not. But he does not have a record of being a vocal advocate for defense spending when Bill Clinton was slashing it. And he has been on the wrong side of the debate on homeland security. He supports closing Guantanamo Bay, which would result in granting an array of constitutional protections to al-Qaeda detainees, and limiting legitimate interrogation techniques that have, in fact, saved American lives. Combined with his (past) de-emphasis on border-security, I think its fair to say that McCains positions are more in line with the ACLU than most conservatives.
Why recite this record? Well, if conservatives dont act now to stop McCain, he will become the Republican nominee and he will lose the general election. He is simply flawed on too many levels. He is a Republican Hillary Clinton in many ways. Many McCain supporters insist he is the only Republican who can beat Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama. And they point to certain polls. The polls are meaningless this far from November. Six months ago, the polls had Rudy winning the Republican nomination. In October 1980, the polls had Jimmy Carter defeating Ronald Reagan. This is no more than spin.
But wouldnt the prospect of a Clinton or Obama presidency drive enough of the grassroots to the polls for McCain? It wasnt enough to motivate the base to vote in November 2006 to stop Nancy Pelosi from becoming speaker or the Democrats from taking Congress. My sense is it wont be enough to carry McCain to victory, either. And McCain has done more to build animus among the people whose votes he will need than Denny Hastert or Bill Frist. And there wont be enough Democrats voting for McCain to offset the electorate McCain has alienated (and is likely to continue to alienate, as best as I can tell).
McCain has not won overwhelming pluralities, let alone majorities, in any of the primaries. A thirty-six-percent win in Florida doesnt make a juggernaut. But the liberal media are promoting him now as the presumptive nominee. More and more establishment Republican officials are jumping on McCains bandwagon the latest being Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has all but destroyed Californias Republican party.
Lets face it, none of the candidates are perfect. They never are. But McCain is the least perfect of the viable candidates. The only one left standing who can honestly be said to share most of our conservative principles is Mitt Romney. I say this as someone who has not been an active Romney supporter. If conservatives dont unite behind Romney at this stage, and become vocal in their support for him, then they will get McCain as their Republican nominee and probably a Democrat president. And in either case, we will have a deeply flawed president.
Mark Levin, a former senior Reagan Justice Department official, is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host.
Levin, Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter
What more will it take?
There won’t be much rallying for Romney because many of see him as little, if any, better than McCain.
BUMP for Mitt
PING! to your list.
I cannot believe how many people are willing to sacrifice their political credibility to throw their support behind men who have such sordid records.
Mark... geez fella.
We have all those things (and more) to look forward to if Happy McCain gets the nomination.
Sent my donation to Romney last night. Go Mitt.
The problem with this article—and I have great respect for the author—is that a similar litany of awfulness could easily be assembled to describe Slick Willard.
It takes a man that doesn’t have Romney’s history. That’s all.
Sending $$$ to Romney now.
Having said that, after reading of Obamas interest in legalizing marijuana, and the Clintons new Middle East ties, I would hold my nose and vote for McCain.
Excellent piece. Hopefully not too late, with all the MSM giddily reporting McCain’s likely nomination.
Voice of Reason Rally for Mitt PING!
Thank you, Mark!
Good, looks like he’ll need it to do all those infomercials.
I dont get it either - especially since we are talking about a man who claimed to be to the left of Ted Kennedy on abortion, gun control and gay rights. Then there is this thing in which he forced health care on citizens (call it hillary care light).
I think the bottom line is that these guys hate McCain with a passion - not that its hard to do - but they are blindly following someone who is the GOP's John Kerry.
Mark Levin is a wise, wise man. McCain must be stopped now.
What more will it take?
One of the FR threads today mentioned that James Dobson has given a "stealth" endorsement of Romney. If the evangelicals that are voting for Huckabeee switch to Romney we may be able to stop a disasterous nomination of McCain.
In the real world in which we live, we rarely get everything we want. Romney, not my first choice, seems to be the leader I can rally behind. I will do so rather than go home crying.
The difference is that Reagan actually liked Ford...none of the candidates on the GOP slate can stand Romney. They hate his guts. Wonder why that is? Could he actually be the dirtbag that everyone who really gets close to him say he is?
This is not some game. This is the future of our country we are talking about. The choosing of those next SCOTUS judges being key. I have no doubt that the holier-than-thou purists can look in the mirror and thank themselves when Hill & Bill are sitting in our Oval Office again selecting the next Ginsburg (or McCain choosing the next O'Connor if he can squeak out a win by some miracle).
Those who cannot see the difference between Mitt and McCain, do so at our country's peril. McCain agrees with them (Hillary & Obama) NOT US (and Mitt) on global warming, immigration, amnesty, marriage amendment, embryonic stem cell research funding, lawyer lobbyists, big government, terrorists' rights, social security for illegals, Gitmo, waterboarding, judges etc.
“Sent my donation to Romney last night. Go Mitt.”
I just contributed on his web site. I’ve been holding out but last nights debate nailed it for me.
A time machine so Romney could go back in time and change his record and prior positions.....
Feh... sometimes things have to totally fall apart before you can build them back up again.
If the military can’t figure it out and still vote for this turkey, then there is little hope. Anybody got a 3rd party invitation?
Sent my few dollars to Mitt this morning.
It would be interesting to know McCain’s inner thoughts on the fairness doctrine. We have seen his proclivity to move in directions to limit voice in the arena of elections.
Nope. Not effectively, not a fact.
Neither one of those pathetic liberals was ever getting my vote.
I’m afraid if McCain is the nominee, the MSM and Dems will then bring up the temper issue, the “gook” comment, etc., and will probably find some embarrassing footage of McCain blowing his top. And Levin makes a good point about the polls showing McCain, but not Romney, leading Hillary - it is way too early to treat those as the final word.
Stop McCain now!
I agree. I still maintain that if any of the remaining candidates had a (D) behind their name, suddenly the right would dispise them and fight with all their might to defeat them. Now they’re willing to vote for them.
Who would that be? I can see the difference, just as I can see the difference between hemlock and cyanide.
...do so at our country's peril.
Either way lies our country's peril.
Me too. He needs the help..
It would be a little more believable if they were turning to Romney as the only remaining hope after the real conservatives were driven from the race.
Unfortunately, however, it was National Review and Hugh Hewitt and a few others who sold their heritage for a mess of pottage and bought the Romney “electability” myth to begin with.
Now we’re down to two losers, largely because of their stupidity, and they want us to hop on board the Romney express.
I would agree that Romney is the lesser of two evils. But whose fault is it that we are in this mess? National Review, Hugh Hewitt, and a few others, including some of the Evangelical leaders who got into a snit about Fred, even though he is the closest of all the conservative candidates to their own positions. Huckabee? Don’t make me laugh.
People seem to be forgetting that Romney was gov of Massacommunists! Of course he has some liberal stains on his record! Not possible for him to govern that cesspool of socialism without giving ground on some leftwing cr@p! Sheesh.
McCain, on the other hand, is FAR more flawed with NO excuse or reason.
Since when is Romney a conservative? Wasn’t he the Governor of Mass? Didn’t he sign an “assault weapons” ban?
Thank u Mark!!!
Just don't pretend you were ever going to do anything else.
Maybe everyone but you isn’t wrong.
That’s funny. I know you don’t think in these terms, but you could mirror that and change the names IMO.
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.