Skip to comments.McCain strategist endorses same-sex marriage [Steve Schmidt]
Posted on 03/25/2009 8:03:36 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Link only, per FR copyright and posting policy
(Excerpt) Read more at washblade.com ...
All the McRoaches are emerging from the woodwork...note Schmidt was affiliated with Schwarzenegger too...
He didn’t endorse Romney. He said positive things about every concievable candidate, Romney, Pawlenty, Palin, etc.
Says it all doesn’t it between him, and his daughter...makes you wonder, or know that it was GOOD that McCain lost!
Meghan McCain is on the same page.
this is the reason McCain had NO CORE SUPPORT. Zzero zip.
McCain had only the “Not Obama” and the “pro-palin” voter.
there were no “mccain voters” in significant ammounts.
If mccain had real support he would not have had to resort to vote splitting by using Thompson, mccain’s friend, and huckabee, useful idiot.
No wonder McCain lost. Thank God.
My apologies to those FReepers who stayed home and sat on their hands on election night. This Trojan horse could have been ours.
I worked as a volunteer for the McCain campaign ..and Little Miss Meghan started scaring us early on with her lib leaning blog. Also, in People mag(I think it was), she said she was “not as Conservative as her father”. Oh really? Since Daddy is and was anything but, I guess she was joining the ranks of the Obamanots early on.
In other words, I truly don't mind if a subset of Republicans are themselves in favor of changing laws to accomodate homosexual unions. But for them to gloss over, as if trivial, laws being passed by the people's representatives *versus* change by judicial fiat really really bothers me.
Forgot something: Steve Schmidt, the Bullet, was supposed to be the Savior that would swoop in and save the McCain campaign: a mover and a shaker who was going to turn it all around for Johnny.
He was inaccessible: an enigma during the campaign. Noone could figure out who or where he was. And as we all found out, the magic stategerie never panned out.
I still can’t believe I voted for this putz. There isn’t enough bleach and or a strong enough power-washer to get that stink off. I’ll carry the shame with me for the rest of my days.
I agree with Mass Resistance’s version. Not Romney’s.
In retrospect, the magic strategery probably worked exactly as it was intended to.
I can safely say that “I did not”: I proudly voted for Chuck Baldwin!
Troll much, boy ?
There is no indication that McCain would've done the same. And as bad as McCain is, he isn't as bad as Obama. So thanks to those who sat on their hands on election day, we now have a commie dictator destroying the country. Wait until he starts filling the courts with hundreds of ultra liberal judges.
Have a feeling you may be visited by a Zot.
How else can you explain someone so inarticulate and ignorant?
It’s curious, since allowing same-sex couples to pretend to be married fails the test of voting everywhere, even in California.
Why would “strategists” think the GOP should give up things they support which are popular?
I like both Govs. Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin very much. Neither is the least intolerant of homosexuals, yet communicate resistance to gay marriage in very reasonable ways.
Same here. I went home after voting, took an iodine bath, induced vomiting, and listened to 2 hours of Burl Ives recordings to wash the horror from my mind. Seriously, for the first time, I contributed significantly to a campaign and put a campaign sign in my yard, all because of the horror of an Obama presidency. I'm almost embarrassed now. At least our known enemy isn't a hypocrite.
And the grass hasn't grown where I had the sign.
And McCain wouldn't have? I used to think he wouldn't, but he's exposed himself for what he is - a libtard turncoat.
It doesn’t matter to me how tolerant or intolerant one is to homosexuals. What matters to me is their deeds in fighting off the homo leftist agenda. Do they go to the mat over fighting it or not. Mitt has a history of Giuliani-esque cheerleading for them.
There is no question McCain is bad. I don't like the man, but I think he is far better than Obama, and regarding appointing judges he probably would've done a better job. McCain's record supporting conservative judges in the senate is solid, and remember he voted against Obama stimulus.
You obviously have low standards.
On the contrary. I love my country, thus voting for McCain was the better alternative. Even Rush and Mark Levin were saying the same thing. That doesn’t mean I agree with McCain 100% but having Obama as president might meet your high standards.
As much as I loathe McCain, anything would have been better then the clown we have now..plus, if McCain had won, we would have had Sarah in the White House where she belongs instead of that moron Biden, who still talks like a 2 year old
“And as bad as McCain is, he isn’t as bad as Obama. So thanks to those who sat on their hands on election day, we now have a commie dictator destroying the country. Wait until he starts filling the courts with hundreds of ultra liberal judges. “
And is destroying our currency, is not supporting needed nuclear energy development, passed a budget that allows faith based groups to be kicked off of college campuses, shows weakness to our enemies ( Iran in particular), floats legislation that would mandate young people “volunteer” for govt service, etc etc.
Do people really believe we would not be better off with McCain/Palin (flaws and all)?
Indeed, you are correct.
...regarding appointing judges he probably would've done a better job. McCain's record supporting conservative judges in the senate is solid...
I agree that McCain's nominees for justices would have been slightly better than Obama's, and this is where the danger lies. A radical leftist nominee by Obama will raise sharply polarized opposition, from most R's and from many "conservative" D's. At best, this will result in gridlock, much as the Democrats have done to many judicial nominees of Bush over the past 8 years. A McCain nominee, on the other hand, would have been a compromise to appease a Dem majority in both houses - only slightly better than Obama's, but just as deadly to conservatism. His "moderate" choice would have sailed through confirmation hearings.
I'd rather a confirmed enemy, than a cowardly "friend."
Senators Snow and Jeffords added an amendment that prevented unions and corporations from "electioneering" with ads that mentioned a name close to an election. That was a bit dubious but unions and corporations were state created entities with special priveleges and the regulations were well within Constitutional limits.
At the last minute Senator Wellstone cobbled together another amendment that extended the prohibition to "non-profits" ie. the NRA. This is the infamous "Wellstone Amendment". Everyone thought that it was unconstitutional, including John McCain. He fought against it and voted against it. Twenty four Republicans voted for the Wellstone Amendment but one of the was not John McCain.
The vote was close but it passed due to the support from MITCH MCCONNELL AND TRENT LOTT AND PHIL GRAMM. Like the true southern gentlemen that they are, they openly collaborated with the Democrats to get the final few votes to put it over the top. In trying to preserve their thiefdoms they were looking for a poison pill for the Supreme Court to find unconstitutional and strike down the bill.
Unfortunately for them the bill was made severable (if one part were held unconstitutional the others would remain standing). President Bush signed the bill expecting that the Supreme Court would excise the offending section. That was what he said when he signed it. AND THEN THE COURT FOUND THE BASICS OF THE CFR (INCLUDING THE WELLSTONE AMENDMENT) CONSTITUTIONAL.
Everyone was shocked, including McCain. The dirt-for-brains goober conserbatibes had breached the First Amendment by trying to be too cute by half. It was McConnell and Lott who slid the knife into the backs of the American people. They gambled with our constitutional rights....and lost.
You are forgetting that Obama doesn't have much congressional opposition. You are forgetting that he doesn't need Republicans to pass any of his legislation or to confirm judges in the Senate. He's got all the votes he needs.
Now, before everyone starts jumping on what I posted, get this clear: I DON'T LIKE MCCAIN, in fact I can't stand the man. So do not pile me with complaints about RINOs or GOP moderates, or their supporters. And this is not about 'friends' or 'enemies,' it's about who judges cases.
You are not alone.
It would be easier to take if he weren’t a stinkin’ senator on top of it.
Both nominees were senators, and if that doesn’t state the level of incompetence of American voters after almost 50 years of not letting one of these POS’s in, cannot imagine what the litter will be in 2012.
All 100 of them.
And you are forgetting that the Republicans in the Senate still have the filibuster if they so choose to employ it, not that the RINO 3 will join in. Remember that all Republicans and several Democrats refused to vote for the bailout, although it sailed through on the votes that they had. So Obama doesn't have all the Dem votes in the bag; there are actually some fairly conservative Democrats in Congress that make Specter and the Maine Feminazi Twins look liberal in comparison. A radical leftist nominee will not get the vote of these few Dems and with the Republicans we have, it's very well conceivable that an Obama nominee will be blocked (60 needed to confirm).
If this stalemate can be maintained until 2010, I think there is a good chance to regain some seats, if not a majority in one chamber. Who knows with the way things are going?
I really don't have any other choice. The alternative would be maddening.
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.