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

Skip to comments.

Why McCain Lost
Newsmax ^ | 11/06/08 | Michael Reagan

Posted on 11/06/2008 5:49:40 PM PST by DocT111

Barack Obama is president-elect of the United States because the Republican Party and John McCain handed him the presidential election on a silver platter.

The Republican Party and the Bush White House walked away from Republican ideals, and they walked away from Republican values.

George Bush allowed the Republican Congress to overspend in the first six years of his administration without once using the veto pen; he blindsided the conservative Republican members of Congress on many occasions, and walked away from the base of his party on immigration reform and other issues such as Medicare and No Child Left Behind.

He refused to sit down and break bread with the conservative members of his own party on Capitol Hill, yet believed that he could break bread with the liberal Democrats in Washington the way he did with the Democrats in Austin, Texas. And when he discovered it didn't work in Washington, it failed to stop him from trying and trying and trying over again what was obviously impossible.

Finally, the coup de grace was Dick Cheney's endorsement of John McCain in the waning days of the campaign, which gave Barack Obama the final nail to put in the coffin of McCain's campaign, which was striving mightily to distance him from the Bush administration.

Then there was McCain's campaign itself. It was the worst campaign since Bob Dole's on the Republican side, and the best campaign since Ronald Reagan’s on the Democrat side.

The McCain campaign was a campaign out of the 20th century, while the Democrats were running a campaign in the 21st century.

We need to understand that this was not a referendum on Reaganomics and Ronald Reagan. This was a referendum on George Bush, and Bush-ism, and Bush’s lack of leadership.

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


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; bds; blame; bushbashing; mccain; mccainjohnmccain; michaelreagan; morebds; morebushbashing; postmortem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

1 posted on 11/06/2008 5:49:40 PM PST by DocT111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DocT111

the bushes are liberal republicans.

mccain-feingold 2008 is a liberal republican.

bob dope 1996 is a liberal republican.


2 posted on 11/06/2008 5:51:30 PM PST by ken21 (people die and you never hear from them again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

YES,YES, YES, I have been saying this since late 2006. THANK YOU!


3 posted on 11/06/2008 5:52:38 PM PST by sickoflibs ( Where were McCain's moderates and illegals on election day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

Right about now I am glad he lost. Now we can really draw a bright line between socialism and capitalism. Out with all RINOS!.


4 posted on 11/06/2008 5:52:38 PM PST by screaminsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

Uh... because Republicans don’t want to vote for a DEMOCRAT


5 posted on 11/06/2008 5:53:41 PM PST by Mr. K (Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

ACORN’S 50 STATE PLAN


6 posted on 11/06/2008 5:54:40 PM PST by Carley (Vote McCain/Palin.....Change babies can live with.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111
Because McCain's plan of running from the center, being in the center and attracting moderates, Democrat lite if you will, was a spectacular failure from the start. Reaching across the aisle as a campaign strategy is now proved as the world's biggest loser.

Ronald Reagan showed the way to win, crystal clear conservatism, attract the center to your side. Of course, you have to be conservative to have any chance of that strategy working in the first place.

7 posted on 11/06/2008 5:55:08 PM PST by Tarpon (America's first principles freedom, liberty and self-reliance will never fail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken21

Rats, “Who stole my cheeze” rats ye say.

Never again. No more Mamby Pamby sell out beholden thiefs.

Buuuhhh bye, bye. Now, get outta here. We want and need nothing more to do with these enemies within.


8 posted on 11/06/2008 5:56:11 PM PST by Griegorio (No More Mamby Pamby Rhinos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

I worked as a get-out-the-vote volunteer for McCain and can attest to the inferiority of our effort relative to the Obamites. No question about it, they beat us like a rented mule.


9 posted on 11/06/2008 5:56:24 PM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken21

Liberal Republicans never win. Ever. Under any circumstances. Ever.

I hope we all get that now. It won’t ever change. Ever.


10 posted on 11/06/2008 5:56:30 PM PST by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DocT111
We had a LOSER candidate who was really a democRAT. He wouldn't name names on the Fanny May mess, or hammer Obama about infanticide. He wouldn't hammer Obama about his voting for sex ed for kindergartners or a plethora of other things he should have been hammered on. McCain had a target rich environment, but failed to take advantage of it.

How many "Christian" folks voted for Obama because they were totally stupid and ignorant of his stand on abortion/late term abortion and his voting record of allowing abortion survivors to slowly die?

Maybe if RINO McCain would have hammered him on that, they'd have not been ignorant of it.

RINO McCain performed almost exactly like those of us who were unhappy with him being chosen as our candidate were afraid he'd do. A long career of kissing rat butt made him a LOSER!

His concession speech proved that - just what exactly are the 50 million of us who voted against Obama supposed to unify with the rats on? Abortion, Taxes, Surrender in Iraq? More welfare? Bigger government?

11 posted on 11/06/2008 5:57:55 PM PST by Slump Tester (What if I'm pregnant Teddy? Errr-ahh -Calm down Mary Jo, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

Thanks for posting! Michael Reagan has nailed it!


12 posted on 11/06/2008 5:58:14 PM PST by PhiKapMom ( BOOMER SOONER LetsGetThisRight.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
Liberal Republicans never win. Ever. Under any circumstances. Ever. I hope we all get that now. It won’t ever change. Ever.

PURGE THE GOP OF ALL RINOS AND MODERATES!

13 posted on 11/06/2008 5:58:27 PM PST by frogjerk (Welcome|Goodbye to|from Free|Fairness Doctrine Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

Five things the Republicans must due by 2010:

1) Make Mike Pence or Thaddeus McCotter the minority leader in the House.

2) Make Michael Steele the RNC chairman

3) Take out John McCain in the 2010 Arizona Republican Sentae Primary

4) Destroy Mitt Romney and his camp

5) Provide Sarah Palin the forum to allow the country to see who she really is.


14 posted on 11/06/2008 5:58:33 PM PST by AmericanSphinx71 (Pray for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111
Finally, the coup de grace was Dick Cheney's endorsement of John McCain in the waning days of the campaign, which gave Barack Obama the final nail to put in the coffin of McCain's campaign, which was striving mightily to distance him from the Bush administration.

Good on Vice-President Cheney!!!! How many times did lord McCain stand up for and stand beside President Bush and or Vice President Cheney over the past 7+ years.

lord McCain spent these past years throwing one temper tantrum after another and to be accusing President Bush as the one siding with liberals for the spending removes responsibility from those that write the legislation to spend it in the first place.

I am really tired of the bash Bush/Cheney when this nation has been protected from any more terrorist attacks. I cannot say I believe this will continue. lord McCain is allll about closing gitmo and moving those terrorists to Forth Leavenworth, Kansas. Oh I did vote for Sarah!

15 posted on 11/06/2008 5:59:22 PM PST by Just mythoughts (Isa.3:4 And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanSphinx71
4) Destroy Mitt Romney and his camp

Good list, and Romney HAS got to go, the back-stabbing smarmy-CEO-weasel.

16 posted on 11/06/2008 6:00:47 PM PST by King Moonracer (Bad lighting and cheap fabric, that's how you sell clothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon

You know what Democrats call Republicans who reach across the aisle?

Sucker!


17 posted on 11/06/2008 6:03:47 PM PST by Jim Robinson (We have not yet begun to fight!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

If the party doesn’t end open primaries there is an excellent chance that another Dole/Bush/McCain will be nominated yet again in 2012. And conservatives had better start identifying and supporting candidates that hold conservative views and running these against RINOs. This will take unity and unity is achieved by agreeing to a minimum set of principles that makes a conservative a conservative. This does not have to be long or complicated but it must embody the overall principles of conservatism. Things like supporting strong national defence, support for a pro-life agenda, fiscal responsibilty, low taxes and limited government would likely be on such a list.


18 posted on 11/06/2008 6:04:55 PM PST by scory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim, exactly, personally I am tired of the Republicans who pander to the Democrats in Congress.

Democrats don't play fair and they never will, until the Republicans grow a pair and hammer back, we will continue to lose in future elections.

We need a candidate who is truly a Conservative and can actually talk and know what they are talking about.

19 posted on 11/06/2008 6:10:47 PM PST by Recon by Fire (Obama is a dude posing as another dude, who is impersonating another dude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon

RE “plan of running from the center,:

He went ‘right’ in summer on drilling and started beating BoB. But in September he tried that reformer not republican work with democrat crap and it was a disaster. So in October he went purely negative and claimed that he was against the bailout bill in september, which everyone knew was crap. Now going negative was great, it was key to next year for us. But by october he had already flipped all over the place and had no believable positive message required to win that last 4 %. I do thank him for going negative, key to opposition in 2009. Thank you (seriously)


20 posted on 11/06/2008 6:11:33 PM PST by sickoflibs ( Where were McCain's moderates and illegals on election day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Slump Tester
"We had a LOSER candidate who was really a democRAT."

Yes and, if I remember correctly, Michael endorsed McCain by saying that his Dad would have wholeheartedly supported him. I choked on that at the time and was chided quite a bit around here. Now Michael wants to complain that McCain handed the election to the democrats? Please.

21 posted on 11/06/2008 6:13:20 PM PST by JustaDumbBlonde (America: Home of The Free Because of The Brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DocT111; All
This is as good an analysis as any. But the real problem was in the primaries. This is where the election was lost. There were too many winner take all primaries stacked up early in the season. With only a plurality of votes McCain slipped through and ran up a huge lead in delegates. Maybe someone can correct me but the way I remembered it was that when Romney dropped out he had as many popular votes as McCain. McCain was a candidate who 2/3 of the Republicans didn't want. I was sick to my stomach when he was nominated. I knew we were in for trouble. There are good reasons to have these primaries spaced out over a period of time. We should never allow independents to vote in Republican primaries.
Could Romney have beaten Obama? I like to think so. Certainly the age question would have worked in Romney's favor. Romney is 60 but looks like 50. He's extremely good looking and this just might have helped with the single women where Obama won 70-30. I know this is frivolous but we must consider why some of the knuckle draggers out there voted for Obama. Certainly Obama could not have won the glamour contest against Romney. Romney would have raised far more money than McCain did. This might have helped. Some conservatives didn't like Romney either but I ask you who is your ideal candidate? They couldn't produce one. So now you must deal with reality.
22 posted on 11/06/2008 6:14:46 PM PST by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

There is a lot of things bash worthy about the Bushes, BUT, John McCain, “Republican” candidate for President campaigned against George Bush, assuming everyone hated him (stupid).

I bet you a LOT of the Republicans who stayed home did so for that reason, I have a ton of problems with W, but there have been no attacks, not even a car bomb in America since 9/11. You could have won millions of dollars after 9/11 taking that bet, credit where credit is due.

If he credited Bush with keeping the country safe at every rally, I’m sure he would have gotten millions more votes.


23 posted on 11/06/2008 6:15:52 PM PST by word_warrior_bob (You can now see my amazing doggie and new puppy on my homepage!! Come say hello to Jake & Sonny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

There was never any Straight-Talk. McCain never named names. The whole economic crisis McCain was absent. This was an opportunity to lead, and he failed to be a leader.

Now his incompetent advisors are trying to shift the blame from themselves onto Palin. These imbeciles should have been Standing Up and Fighting Obama, instead of waiting until after they lost and backstabbing a Republican.


24 posted on 11/06/2008 6:16:21 PM PST by igoramus08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
“Finally, the coup de grace was Dick Cheney’s endorsement of John McCain in the waning days of the campaign, which gave Barack Obama the final nail to put in the coffin of McCain's campaign, which was striving mightily to distance him from the Bush administration.”

Bravo for Cheney. McCain wouldn't have had to work so hard to distance himself from Bush if he'd not knifed Bush in the back so many times in the last eight years. Disagreements over policies are fine, organizing his gang of 13 was over the top.

25 posted on 11/06/2008 6:20:53 PM PST by bitterohiogunclinger (America held hostage - day 2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
It did seem that every once in a while, a screw came loose and he reverted to the same old reach across the aisle crap that McCain tried to sell in the Senate. Even Sarah was forced to eat that crap sandwich.

But never forget it was the McCain strategy that was fatally flawed from the get go. Running as Democrat lite is a 100% loser proposition.

26 posted on 11/06/2008 6:21:04 PM PST by Tarpon (America's first principles freedom, liberty and self-reliance will never fail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DocT111
Good article and post but I must take issue with this:

The Republican Party and the Bush White House walked away from Republican ideals

The Party, the Bush White House, and the McCain campaign, save Palin, were not even in the same ZIP Code/Area Code/County/what have you with true Republican ideals, IMO. The poster that pointed out how Reagan campaigned and drew centrists to his position was absolutely right on point.

There was not even a nodding acquaintance with real conservatism among that pack of RINOs and it didn't take being a charter subscriber to National Review to understand that basic premise. I suspect that even Joe the Plumber could have told them that.

27 posted on 11/06/2008 6:24:14 PM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon

I agree with you on all your points, did you steal them from me? :)

but seriously, glad to compare ideas with you.


28 posted on 11/06/2008 6:27:20 PM PST by sickoflibs ( Where were McCain's moderates and illegals on election day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

Obama ran what is tantamount to an affirmative action campaign. The usual vetting was simply not applied to him. He was given special treatment, a dark horse (no pun intended) who remained dark up to the day he was elected, right down to the document he is protecting from view in Hawaii.


29 posted on 11/06/2008 6:28:56 PM PST by Phantom4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

No I wrote the same thing the night McCain lost. You can check if you want.

But it’s true, regardless who came up with it. Truths don’t vary.


30 posted on 11/06/2008 6:29:03 PM PST by Tarpon (America's first principles freedom, liberty and self-reliance will never fail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DocT111
(1) Rumsfeld vetoed "go large", which would have won the war in 2 years instead of stalling and accomplishing nothing for the first 3 years.

(2) Bush had a chance to pick any issue he liked to fight his second term on, and he picked one that split his own party wide open, out of pure political arrogance.

(3) Paulson had a chance to prevent the market slaughter before us by preventing a disorderly bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, and he insisted on doing nothing instead, to cater to doctrinaire libertarian puritans and duck populust flack over bailouts for bankers, for one week.

Those three policy mistakes, all reflecting collosal arrogance, ideological stridency, contempt for pragmatism and long experience, and a smugness about the consequences of world-historical proportions. All were entirely unforced own goals. All were violently opposed at the time by wiser men and rammed through anyway.

Now don't say we didn't tell you so.

31 posted on 11/06/2008 6:30:41 PM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
Uh... because Republicans conservatives don’t want to vote for a DEMOCRAT.

Exit polling showed plenty of both did not vote for him, but plenty of rino's and republicans did.

32 posted on 11/06/2008 6:38:39 PM PST by org.whodat ( "the Whipped Dog Party" , what was formally the republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AmericanSphinx71
You left out the part about getting ready for another bob dole experience.
33 posted on 11/06/2008 6:40:14 PM PST by org.whodat ( "the Whipped Dog Party" , what was formally the republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DocT111
Michael Reagan nails it. I especially liked these paragraphs:

Bush had the bully pulpit but failed to use it, and the Democrats walked away.

Shockingly, John McCain failed to use the most potent weapon in his arsenal — the culpability of Barack Obama and his friends in the wholesale looting of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that led to the current debacle. McCain had the goods, but wouldn't exploit them.

Also, I will add my own point:

Governor Sarah Palin out-staged McCain and McCain limited her to keep the spotlight from going off him. He failed to use Governor Palin effectively I believe, because it would make him seem less effective. When Gov. Palin was allowed to get media exposure, it was not well thought out. They let her go on taped interviews, which allowed her comments to be twisted by editing tactics. Not a smart idea. For those who get paid the big bucks to run a campaign, they should have been fired immediately for this failure.

The McCain campaign did not meet the task countering the media campaign against Gov. Palin. She was assaulted with a barage of issues from stupid things like the clothing cost to the Saturday Night Live barbs. The McCain campaign sat on their thumbs and acted as if the media war was not happening. They should have given top priority to the media destruction effort against Sarah Palin. It showed McCain campaign was not up to the task of countering the media war. If McCain thought this media war was tough, he showed that he was not up to the task of what he would experience as President. Those on his staff who let this failure happen should have been given their walking papers.

34 posted on 11/06/2008 6:45:36 PM PST by jonrick46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

Contrary to what Michael says, Ronald Reagan would have never voted for Obama, even though he would have been disappointed in the Republicans. Reagan would have seen that Obama was an enemy of the freedom that is the foundation for America’s success.

Ironically, though, it was Reagan’s selection of George H.W. Bush, which was a capitulation to the notion that conservatives needed to please the moderates, that is at the bottom of our current problem. Without this selection, there is no George W. Bush and the “compassionate conservatism” which has brought us the Medicare prescription drug bill, the excessive spending, the failed immigration reform, the bailout, and a host of other problems. While I believe that President Bush did the right thing in Iraq for the right reasons, his presidency has been a mixed bag for conservatives, as he told us it would be from the start. I wish President Reagan had selected somebody more firmly on the right.


35 posted on 11/06/2008 6:47:12 PM PST by redtkt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ccmay

Agree. I attended a McCain-Palin rally just after the convention. I found out about the rally on the McCain website, and in order to “pre-request” my tix, I was instructed to email a McCain campaign office in my area. When I picked up my tix at the office, I had to give them my driver’s license to verify. They had both my email address and my address. Not once after that was I sent email requesting time or money for the candidate.

I had heard that McCain’s campaign website was inferior to Obama’s in how it approached and appealed to visitors (read “potential donors and volunteers”), so I visited Obama’s campaign website to check things out. In order to do something on the site (maybe to see if there were rallies in my area?), I had to supply my email...I’m glad I supplied my Yahoo address which has a great spam filter because I was sent several emails a week from “Barack Obama”, “Michelle Obama”, “Joe Biden”, et al. asking for both money and time...”just five dollars”...”send ten dollars and you get a bumper sticker”...

Even though Obama’s announcing his VP pick via text messaging was a stunt, it was symbolic of his grasp of the power of new communications technologies...McCain was horse and buggy compared to Obama’s high speed rail.

Missy


36 posted on 11/06/2008 6:52:36 PM PST by missycocopuffs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46
They should have given top priority to the media destruction effort against Sarah Palin.

Yes, a one on one interview with all who wanted one would have corrected the issue for sure. But then she can do that tomorrow.

37 posted on 11/06/2008 6:55:21 PM PST by org.whodat ( "the Whipped Dog Party" , what was formally the republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: JasonC
3) Paulson had a chance to prevent the market slaughter before us by preventing a disorderly bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, and he insisted on doing nothing instead, to cater to doctrinaire libertarian puritans and duck populust flack over bailouts for bankers, for one week.

An honest question: What means could Paulson have used to prevent this "disorderly bankruptcy" of Lehman Bros. and what would that have ultimately accomplished?
38 posted on 11/06/2008 6:59:03 PM PST by Bishop_Malachi (Liberal Socialism - A philosophy which advocates spreading a low standard of living equally.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DocT111

Thank you Mr. Reagan!!


39 posted on 11/06/2008 7:21:33 PM PST by gidget7 (Duncan Hunter-Valley Forge Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon

Exactly so and well said.


40 posted on 11/06/2008 7:23:21 PM PST by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

“PURGE THE GOP OF ALL RINOS AND MODERATES!”

Isn’t this a redundent statement? :-)
Moderates and rino’s are the same in my book.

But I agree completwly.


41 posted on 11/06/2008 7:23:57 PM PST by stockpirate (Sarah for Chairwoman of the RNC.. Or the RNC can go to hell - BORG - Barack Obama Resistance Group)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Phantom4

Yup.


42 posted on 11/06/2008 7:24:47 PM PST by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY; 60Gunner; AGreatPer; AlwaysFree; Angelwood; Apple Blossom; beandog; BillF; bmwcyle; ...

My short list ping


43 posted on 11/06/2008 7:43:44 PM PST by BufordP (Had Mexicans flown planes into the World Trade Center, Jorge Bush would have surrendered.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BufordP
Thanks for the ping my friend Buford.

Interesting.

We had Palin here and got 20,000.
We had McCain here and couldn't get 5,000.

Looked like McCain was going to sleep most of the election.
Palin was like, a hockey mom.

44 posted on 11/06/2008 8:00:33 PM PST by AGreatPer (Disgusted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: BufordP
Thanks for the ping...

As I end my day, I again remember that I believed John McCain had NO chance from the beginning. His own liberal ideals, combined with Bush low approval, spelled doom. Economic decline in the country was just an added hurdle.

“0” ran a better campaign and only because of the selection of Palin did any enthusiasm begin.

Now our team members are helping to tear her down.

I say “John get out there and stop this from your employees or volunteers. You lost but you are not done and are still in charge of the campaign staff”!

The conservative message did not lose, so we all need to help ourselves reorganize and begin again.

45 posted on 11/06/2008 8:24:21 PM PST by 3D-JOY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: BufordP

If you really want to be ill go look at the results of the votes on the California ballot proposiyions. All the conservative issues won!


46 posted on 11/07/2008 2:48:18 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine's brother (Hey Zero you are a Marxist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine's brother
Yes and black people carried the issues to victory while a majority of white people voted for the immoral issues. As I posted a few times it appears that white women are becoming a moral problem in this country. They were a great majority of voters for Barry also.

DUMP ALL RINOs. Let's start again.

47 posted on 11/07/2008 2:59:53 AM PST by bmwcyle (Primary support for McCain and Huck showed complete stupidity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Slump Tester
How many "Christian" folks voted for Obama because they were totally stupid and ignorant of his stand on abortion/late term abortion and his voting record of allowing abortion survivors to slowly die?

I'd argue that a lot of these "Christian" folks knew about Obama's record and stand... and voted for him anyway.

48 posted on 11/07/2008 3:37:07 AM PST by sauropod (An expression of deep worry and concern failed to cross either of Zaphod's faces - hitchhiker's guid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BufordP
Just back from across the pond. Wall-to-wall saturation on the Beeb regarding the coronation, er, election of Barry of Nazereth. Lots of footage of people dancing in the streets, people crying, etc. You would have thought it was the Second Coming.
49 posted on 11/07/2008 3:44:14 AM PST by sauropod (An expression of deep worry and concern failed to cross either of Zaphod's faces - hitchhiker's guid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

From “The Second Coming” by W.B. Yeats

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,


50 posted on 11/07/2008 3:47:15 AM PST by MarDav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

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