Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Straight Talk About Candidate McCain & the Hard Right
Richmond Times Dispatch ^ | 2/10/08 | Ross Mackenzie

Posted on 02/10/2008 12:44:36 PM PST by beejaa

So, with Tsunami Tuesday now history, where do things stand in the Republican nomination race?

At this point we can't know the winner absolutely but -- far more than in the Democratic race -- we can see clearly the shape of things to come. The Republican nominee is going to be John McCain.

I can't vote for him. He's just so, you know, liberal.

Liberal? In this party?

James Dobson can't stand him. Sean Hannity wanted Romney. Huckabee is solid. Strict libertarian "Reason" mag has run an article headlined: "Be Afraid of President McCain: The Frightening Mind of an Authoritarian Maverick." Ann Coulter says if McCain wins the nomination she'll campaign for Hillary. Rush --

article continues

(Excerpt) Read more at inrich.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: election; mackenzie; mccain; potomacprimary; va2008
I thought this might provoke some discussion (gulp).
1 posted on 02/10/2008 12:44:40 PM PST by beejaa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: beejaa

McCain is the anti-Reagan.


2 posted on 02/10/2008 12:55:50 PM PST by Sybeck1 (RIP GOP, Born 1854, Died 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beejaa

Brothas and Sistas, it’s good to have you out this morning. “Amen, amen, amen...”

Today I want you to turn with me in the Good Book to John VIII, Chapter 11 Verse 5, and read along with me. “Yes thank you reverend, amen, amen...”

And the lord spoke form on high saying...

They shall tear down your nation... “Amen!”
They shall smite your military... “Amen, amen, amen, amen...”
They shall shut down your radio stations... “Amen, brother, amen, amen...”
They shall opress the people... “Amen, amen, yes lord...”
They shall cause the government to crush the people... “Oh amen bother...”
There will be a great wailing across the land... “Oh yes brother, amen, amen, amen...”
They shall cause great plagues to befall you... “Amen...”

So be sure and vote for me on November 5th. “Wha??????”

That’s not a platform I can support...

This November, just say no (more).


3 posted on 02/10/2008 12:56:10 PM PST by DoughtyOne (That's right McStain, you'll get my vote when you peel it from my cold dead fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beejaa

I clicked the link, it is well worth reading.


4 posted on 02/10/2008 12:56:44 PM PST by Graybeard58 ( Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beejaa

“Early contemporary conservatism, emphatically not an ideology, was a big-tent affair with room for everyone embracing certain key principles, no matter how wacky some of the consequent views might be. No one dictated acceptable positions on any issue. The effort of some “conservatives” to reject John McCain as a deviationist from their decreed line — to judge him by their litmus tests that (in their minds) he fails — attests to a 20-year ideologization of the Republican Party’s puristic wing.”

He makes it sound like I’ve changed; it wasn’t me that changed, it was the party itself.

McCain, Clinton, Obama - all sitting senators, none in jeopardy of losing his/her seat; only McCain knows that this is his last turn at the Brass Ring, Father Time is not on his side.

If I were a Martian, my money would be on Obama and if I didn’t double my bet this turn, I’d break the Bookie’s bank next go-round.


5 posted on 02/10/2008 1:09:38 PM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer

I wouldn’t put it past HillBill machine that an accident happens to Obama between now and the election. And they wind up capitalizing on it and using his death to propel themselves into office.


6 posted on 02/10/2008 1:13:23 PM PST by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
I don't consider myself an ideologue, particularly, nor a member of any "hard" right. But this hagiography is an attempt, IMHO, to paper over some serious differences of both approach and past track record.

McCain had taken to proclaiming that the border must first be closed before amnesty may be discussed. That is a position quite different from not only those he has expressed in the past, but more importantly those he has acted upon in the past. One expects a politician's public position to alter somewhat depending on circumstance - he is, after all, supposed to be representing the public - but this particular one strains credulity a little and causes most conservatives to question what he will really do in office - what he has said, or what he has done in the past. They're two very different things.

As far as the "gang of 14" bringing us Alito, this is a neat summation and an entirely fallacious representation of events. I do not find the sort of "bipartisanship" comprised of surrending to the other fellow's loud insistence to be particularly laudable. Once again, the conservative must wonder if there isn't a serious discrepancy between word and deed.

And as far as McCain-Feingold, the fact that it was a failure and a rather silly approach does not ameliorate the fact that it was a serious threat to freedom of speech. That McCain thought this compromise to be acceptable calls into question what else he is willing to negotiate away all in the spirit of undying bipartisan chumship in DC.

These then, are fairly serious matters for anyone contemplating voting for McCain, conservative or otherwise. I do not think marginalizing 30% of his potential vote by claiming that we're unreasonable or ideologues is likely to be a fruitful approach. McCain needs to start proposing definite programs if he's going to convince us that his future deeds will match his present words. And we need to hold him to them.

7 posted on 02/10/2008 1:17:40 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Either you don’t know McCain’s record or you don’t know Reagan’s record.


8 posted on 02/10/2008 1:23:15 PM PST by Philly Nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
I can't vote for him. He's just so, you know, liberal.

They got that part correct.

9 posted on 02/10/2008 1:26:22 PM PST by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Actually John 8.11 has the words of Jesus to the woman taken in adultery: "Neither do I condemn thee. Go and sin no more."

That's closer to my attitude. When there were 9 Republican candidates, McCain was near the bottom of the list for me, but now that the possibilities seem to be narrowed down to McCain, Hillary, or Obama being sworn in as the next President, I'd rather have a flawed Republican who is at least conservative on some issues (the war on terror and abortion, for examples) than a Marxist or a crypto-Muslim.

10 posted on 02/10/2008 1:26:45 PM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

—”I called you on your delineation. Not the other way around. “

Agreed.

And they’ll use a Southern Racist as their patsy, so the Clinton machine can get more mileage out of scapegoating white males.


11 posted on 02/10/2008 1:36:06 PM PST by AlanGreenSpam ("Celebrate Diversity! Look at the world with all it's problems - Isn't "diversity" so beautiful?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
McCain Fiendold,

McCain Kennedy,

McCain Lieberman.

McCAin Edwards

Kerry-McCain proposal

Straight talk that Mr McMexico! No Way, NO HOW!

12 posted on 02/10/2008 1:58:30 PM PST by MrPiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

There is no John VIII, Chapter 11 Verse 5.

There is a John 2008, November the fifth...


13 posted on 02/10/2008 2:10:31 PM PST by DoughtyOne (That's right McStain, you'll get my vote when you peel it from my cold dead fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

I know the Clinton’s are ruthless, but you need to get a grip.


14 posted on 02/10/2008 2:13:58 PM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I clicked the link, I wondered what the author had been smoking before writing that twaddle.


15 posted on 02/10/2008 2:21:30 PM PST by eclecticEel (oh well, Hunter 2012 anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

I’m with you. He won’t get my vote. No way. No how. I have a feeling the next prez is going to be Obama. I don’t like it. But so be it. He will be a temorary phenonmenon. Either he or Hillary will flame out it elected.


16 posted on 02/10/2008 2:26:35 PM PST by AdaGray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne; Carry_Okie
The biggest danger is that conservatives and libertarians and other independents so dislike McCain that too many of us stay home on election day in disgust or protest.

Thereby, we let the Dem President come into office with a filibuster proof Senate.

Who is served by that? Many of McCain's backers, that's who!

Ron, I doubt I need remind you how a low voter turn-out was made a certainty when get out the vote funds were withheld from Bill Simon in 2002. A White House that was not OPENLY hostile to conservative candidates played no small role in that.

Well, now think about what the topmost candidate on the GOP ticket, one who has been openly hostile to conservatives, might be capable of.

Do you think you can help? Conservatives who can't be enthused by McCain might readily be convinced to devote their energies to electing particular Congressional or Senate Candidates -- especially if it thwarts the revenge of that angry man at the top.
17 posted on 02/10/2008 2:26:37 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (We are at war with global warming. We've always been at war with GW. Fascism is our friend. </s>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad

Look at post 12. Would the Gipper propose any of those?


18 posted on 02/10/2008 2:28:09 PM PST by Sybeck1 (RIP GOP, Born 1854, Died 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
I agree that we should most assuredly back the good congressional and senate candidates. We must vote for them, even if we plan on writing in for president.
19 posted on 02/10/2008 2:42:37 PM PST by DoughtyOne (That's right McStain, you'll get my vote when you peel it from my cold dead fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Then please agree that all this negative energy needs to be redirected to thwart liberals of all stripes.

The top of the ticket often draws out voters.

Dissatisfaction with that will claim OUR side more than theirs.

UNLESS.

We must drive our side into thwarting our nemeses of all stripes.


20 posted on 02/10/2008 2:47:37 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (We are at war with global warming. We've always been at war with GW. Fascism is our friend. </s>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
It could. Let me pick the Super Tuesday delegates, (states). It might be a different outcome.
21 posted on 02/10/2008 2:51:35 PM PST by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
I will continue to beat John McCain into the dirt, until he is no longer viable.

IMO, a John McCain term in office would be the death of conservatism. I also recognize that if John McCain becomes president he will have no opposition whatsoever in our government.

Republicans will support him because he is a Republican. Democrats will support because he will reach across the isle on almost every issue. He has proven his proclivity to do so.

This presents an opportunity for this nation to be damaged in ways leftist have only dreamed about prior to this. And as the damage takes affect, CONSERVATIVES will get the blame

The media will explain that McCain is after all a Republican, a Conservative. The media won’t care that he’s not a Conservative. They make all the mileage off of it that they can.

Conservatives who disagree with McCain will marginalized. You here are trying to make the case that folks will be crazy to oppose McCain openly even now.

After McCain becomes president, he will eviscerate Republican who dare oppose him on any issue. And who will oppose him the most? Conservatives.

Oh yes, there will be hundreds if not thousands of reasons why we must be silenced. Even our own will talk of what a necessary strategy it will be.

Count me as far out of that idea as you can get.

This man will do incredible damage to this nation from the White House, and I won’t be silent on the issue.

Sorry we can't agree on this. I do appreciate you asking what I think of the idea.

22 posted on 02/10/2008 2:58:37 PM PST by DoughtyOne (That's right McStain, you'll get my vote when you peel it from my cold dead fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
The last conservative nominee was Ronaldus Magnus in 1984.

Should we not vote until he is reeincarnated? Should we sit out until a conservative shows the initiative to win the nomination?

23 posted on 02/10/2008 3:06:22 PM PST by Jacquerie (McCain will offer battle to Islam - The Beast will offer our heads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I am not asking you to stop what you are doing.

I respect it.

I am asking you to make it your business to drive up the opposition to him.

The more conservative republicans who know that they can count on you, the less power the top of the ticket can gain from them.

And in the unexpected event that McCain wins?

They have damn good reason to be beholden to you more than him.


24 posted on 02/10/2008 3:09:11 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (We are at war with global warming. We've always been at war with GW. Fascism is our friend. </s>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

November 5 is the day after the election. The last time the Republicans have lost a Presidential election which fell on November 4 was in 1884, and voter fraud in New York City may have cost them that election (the margin was only 1,000 votes or so, and that tipped the electoral vote majority to Grover Cleveland).


25 posted on 02/10/2008 3:12:11 PM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

1986 Amnesty Bill
Raised Taxes 6 out of 8 years as president
1983 retreat from Lebanon

Who did all this? Was it Bill Clinton? No, Jimmy Carter? No,
It was Ronald Reagan.


26 posted on 02/10/2008 3:40:31 PM PST by Philly Nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad
Raised Taxes 6 out of 8 years as president

Are you one of these guys who counts tax simplification as a tax increase? And oh, by the way, how many tax cuts did Ronald Reagan vote against during his career as a politician?

27 posted on 02/10/2008 3:45:37 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender

If the “Tax Simplification” results in the government taking more of my money then, it’s a tax increase.

I don’t how many times did Reagan vote against tax cuts?


28 posted on 02/10/2008 3:52:49 PM PST by Philly Nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad
If the “Tax Simplification” results in the government taking more of my money then, it’s a tax increase.

Is that what happened to you? Did Reagan's Tax Code Revisions in 1986 result in you paying more tax? And before you answer, you might want to take a look at the following discussion of the 1986 Tax Act.

See Link

The 1986 Act did what most observers thought was impossible: reduce the complexity of the federal tax code. Originally, discussions for reform of the tax code focused on a flat tax system. This system has one tax rate, irrespective of income, and only limited deductions. However, going directly to a single—rate tax structure was not politically feasible, so a compromise emerged from Congress.

Prior to this reform there were eleven income tax brackets with marginal rates ranging from 11% to 50%. In addition, the code was filled with a myriad of deductions and shelters which motivated business and individuals to enter into arrangements not on their economic merits, but rather for the tax consequences. With the passage of the Act, the number of brackets was reduced to three with marginal rates of 15%, 28%, and 33%. In addition, many deductions were eliminated, which reduced many of the economic distortions caused by the previous tax complexity. The end result was a flatter and simpler tax structure.

With the Act's passage, the United States had the lowest marginal tax rates of any major economy. This reform extended the economic expansion brought on by the Reagan tax cuts of 1981 and was one of the foundations that fueled the 1990s boom.

Finally, I don't believe Ronald Reagan (either as Governor of California or as President of the United States) ever opposed a tax cut. That just wasn't his style.

29 posted on 02/10/2008 4:08:55 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender

The 1986 Tax “reform” increased tax revenue, it was a bait and switch on the taxpayer. Sure we’ll reduce your taxes by 10% but we’re increasing the stuff we tax by 20%. But because we are in the Season of Lent, I’ll give that to you. Now you only have to rationalize the other 5 Reagan Tax increases.

And you still haven’t accounted for Reagan’s Amnesty.


30 posted on 02/10/2008 4:26:08 PM PST by Philly Nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad

Could you actually point me to the tax code changes that you say constituted repeated tax increases under Ronald Reagan? Some source material would be appreciated. Aside from that, I am confused as to the point you are trying to make. Are you saying that because Reagan passed a tax increase, we shouldn’t be upset at McCain for (twice) opposing Bush’s tax cuts. If that’s the argument, I have to say it is a pretty lame one.


31 posted on 02/10/2008 4:34:12 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad
The 1986 Tax “reform” increased tax revenue

Yeah, that's called supply-side economics. You reduce marginal rates and thereby increase tax revenue.

32 posted on 02/10/2008 4:35:25 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18399

I don’t think he would have done it again myself.


33 posted on 02/10/2008 4:38:05 PM PST by Sybeck1 (RIP GOP, Born 1854, Died 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
You did put on your asbestos suit, right?

"Here is John McCain, on the night of the South Carolina primary:

"We want government to do its job, not your job; to do it better and to do it with less of your money; to defend our nation's security wisely and effectively, because the cost of our defense is so dear to us; to respect our values because they are the true source of our strength; to enforce the rule of law that is the first defense of freedom; to keep the promises it makes to us and not make promises it will not keep."

This is not a true conservative?"

34 posted on 02/10/2008 4:43:24 PM PST by GVnana ("They're still analyzing the first guy. What do I have to worry about?" - GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad
And you still haven’t accounted for Reagan’s Amnesty.

You got me there. Reagan supported amnesty - which brings to mind the old Smothers Brothers joke.

When Dick asked Tom why he had done something particularly stupid, Tom said it was because so-and-so had told him to do it.

Dick then said 'Hey Tom, if someone told you to jump off a bridge, what would you say?'

'Never again!' was Tom's response.

35 posted on 02/10/2008 4:43:36 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Thank you for that clarification. I will do my best to support every conservative that stands for election in November. I would be more than happy to support that.

I appologize if I misinterpreted your thoughts. It appears I may have.


36 posted on 02/10/2008 4:44:04 PM PST by DoughtyOne (That's right McStain, you'll get my vote when you peel it from my cold dead fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

I frequently address the fifth more than the fourth, because that’s the day we’ll find out what we are saddled with.

The election is on my brother’s birthday this year, and I expect to get the election results about 1:00 am my time.

Thanks for that bit of electoral context. It was interesting.


37 posted on 02/10/2008 4:46:13 PM PST by DoughtyOne (That's right McStain, you'll get my vote when you peel it from my cold dead fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

I frequently address the fifth more than the fourth, because that’s the day we’ll find out what we are saddled with.

The election is on my brother’s birthday this year, and I expect to get the election results about 1:00 am my time.

Thanks for that bit of electoral context. It was interesting.


38 posted on 02/10/2008 4:46:34 PM PST by DoughtyOne (That's right McStain, you'll get my vote when you peel it from my cold dead fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie
The last conservative nominee was Ronaldus Magnus in 1984. Should we not vote until he is reeincarnated?

LOL! No. Some would be happy to drag out his corpse.

39 posted on 02/10/2008 4:50:07 PM PST by GVnana ("They're still analyzing the first guy. What do I have to worry about?" - GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad
I don’t how many times did Reagan vote against tax cuts?

I don't know how many times he voted against tax cuts either. I do know he raised them as governor of California. He didn't really have a choice.

40 posted on 02/10/2008 4:53:20 PM PST by GVnana ("They're still analyzing the first guy. What do I have to worry about?" - GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
McCain is the anti-Reagan.

This is true. Many Democrats liked Reagan in spite of his fierce oppostion to their positions, Democrats only like McCain because of his adoption of their positions.

41 posted on 02/10/2008 4:59:45 PM PST by Biblebelter (I will NEVER EVER vote for McCain or any other current Senator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
It's a good story.

And here we are, what, 22 years later?

I'm one who thinks we're actually going to get something done on this. The American public is fed-up with this issue.

42 posted on 02/10/2008 5:02:55 PM PST by GVnana ("They're still analyzing the first guy. What do I have to worry about?" - GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
Only liberals and Rino’s use terms like “hard right.” They are going to throw a huge tantrum and wet their beds when millions of us refuse to vote for McCain. Our party has sold us out. These elitist country clubbers need a “woodshed election.” This is it.

The Dems are energized. We are disspirited and divided. No way a candidate as divisive as McCain can unify the party. Even if we would all do the nose holding routine at the ballot box again, he’s cooked. I’m not holding my nose for such an awful candidate.

I still remember the GOP telling us that Bob Dole was the most electable candidate in 1996. Dole is going to lok like a steamroller compared to McManiac.

43 posted on 02/10/2008 5:09:40 PM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beejaa

More common-sense quit-whining talk from a conservative columnist:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/who_wants_to_be_a_loser.html

February 10, 2008
Who Wants to be a Loser?
By Debra Saunders

There are elements in the Republican Party who are trying to turn the GOP into the victim party. No matter how much they’ve won, they want to see themselves as losers.

An e-mail I received from a reader summed up the resentment that has been bubbling up all over the GOP. She had liked Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter as GOP hopefuls and didn’t know if she would vote for John McCain.

“I began to rethink my allegiance to the Republican Party last summer with the immigration reform bill after party leaders told the rank and file to screw themselves,” she wrote. “I do not object to Republican leadership having a collegial relationship with Democrats. What I object to is that they always get hosed when they ‘compromise’ in the ‘spirit of bipartisanship.’ Bipartisanship, by definition of the Dems and the media, is doing it the Democrat way. Ronald Reagan, when explaining his departure from the Dem Party, said he didn’t leave the party so much as the party left him.”

I’ve received many e-mails with the same sentiment. It’s odd that those very voters, whose outrage obliterated the immigration bill (which contained amnesty provisions), somehow feel as if they lost that battle.

But they won. They killed the bill. Twice. McCain now promises to secure the borders before proposing a path to citizenship. Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton says that she opposes driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants. The Bush administration has beefed up deportation of “immigration fugitives,” (illegal immigrants in violation of deportation orders) and is going after employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

Bipartisanship means Democrats win? In 2006, Democrats took over Congress. Yet because President Bush has not backed down on Iraq, the Nancy Pelosi-led House and Harry Reid-led Senate are funding the war — including the troop surge, which Democrats opposed.

Washington has not made the Bush tax cuts permanent, but the cuts are still on the books and in Americans’ wallets. Bush promised to work with Democrats on an economic stimulus package. He wanted tax rebates for taxpayers and tax cuts for businesses. Democrats wanted “rebates” for those who don’t pay income taxes, an extension for unemployment benefits and increased subsidies for heating assistance and food stamps. Last week, Democrats agreed to a package that gave Bush what he wanted. While they won smaller rebates for those who pay no income tax, as well as payments for seniors and disabled veterans, the Dems didn’t get the Christmas tree they wanted.

Congressional Democrats thought they had Bush in a corner when they passed a $35 billion expansion in federal funding for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Bush vetoed the bill, then vetoed a second bill. He insists that eligibility be limited to children in families that earn no more than 2 1/2 times the poverty level.

Here’s another biggie: After eight years in which President Bill Clinton nominated big-government justices, Bush managed to place two solid conservatives — not conservatives in name only — in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Bush is a lame duck whom the left has written off as hopelessly stupid — yet he still manages to command Beltway policy — despite a Democratic majority. Indeed, Democratic leaders, who once thought they were so smart, now look feckless before partisans who were convinced a Democratic Congress would force Bush to pull out U.S. troops from Iraq and show the world an America that cuts and runs when the going gets tough.

Still, some conservatives want to believe that they get no respect, that their side isn’t getting anywhere. Like Democrats, they want to be victims. They can always wait until 2009. Then they just might find out what not getting their way really means.


44 posted on 02/10/2008 5:48:01 PM PST by WOSG (Want to blame someone for McCain being the nominee? Blame the Mormon-bashers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
I wouldn't be tagged hard right IF my party hadn't taken such a hard left turn.
45 posted on 02/10/2008 9:44:23 PM PST by exhaustedmomma (Calm down: VOTE AGAINST MCCAIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana

“You did put on your asbestos suit, right?”

My fire extinguisher is at hand.


46 posted on 02/11/2008 1:05:28 AM PST by beejaa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
Reagan knew what he was doing...

We have consistently supported a legalization program which is both generous to the alien and fair to the countless thousands of people throughout the world who seek legally to come to America. The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society. Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008406
47 posted on 02/11/2008 10:15:03 AM PST by Philly Nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: beejaa
Hard right,

Right wing extremists

ideologues.

It's amazing how these McCain supporters now classify the conservative movement.

However, the very fact that the article is being written demonstrates the falsity of its contention. By definition, an extremist is a tiny minority (otherwise he or she wouldn't be an extremist). Political parties have never needed or even wanted extremist among them and they have never had any impact on a election. The very fact that so many McCain supporters are trying so hard to split the conservative movement shows that the anti McCain group is quite large and hardly extreme at all.

48 posted on 02/11/2008 10:25:11 AM PST by CharacterCounts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson