Stephanopoulos: Possible Souter Replacement Sotomayor ‘Strong Centrist’

FinkelBlog ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

It never fails. Let someone’s name be put forward as a possible Dem presidential candidate or judicial nominee, and the MSM will find a way to characterize him as a “centrist.”

We didn’t have to wait long for the tradition to be honored regarding Sonia Sotomayor, who conventional wisdom pegs as the frontrunner to replace David Souter.

On today’s Good Morning America, George Stephanopoulos declared Sotomayor not just a centrist, but a . . . “strong centrist.”

View video here.

[ThomasSawyer]

To an unbiased journalist [COUGH,COUGH, SPUTTER] like Snupholopogous, anyone slightly to the right of Joe Stalin is a “Centrist”.

[Radix]

"IMO, those alleged Republicans who didn't vote for our nominee are just as responsible as any left-wing birkenstock-wearing Democrat in getting the current President elected."

If the results of the McCain beating by Obama does not rouse the "Republicans" to come up with REAL CONSERVATIVE nominees then nothing will.

I voted for someone other than McCain and I am proud of it.

[MDspinboyredux]

Radix
I voted for someone other than McCain and I am proud of it.

Then you're to blame for every Socialist, anti-family, tax hiking piece of crap legislation that comes out of the White House over the next eight years.

Kudos on that. You done real good there champ.

[ThomasSawyer]

The only thing the McCain ticket had going for it was Palin. When was the last time a ticket won based on the VP pick. A major defeat for the moderated GOP was coming, it was just a matter of when, not if. Blaming folks that voted third party may help you vent, but will do nothing to address the problem at the root which is a bunch of career inside-the-beltway Republicans that have sacrificed their principals and those of us who have been their enablers for far too long.

[TheFourthMagi]

Would you have voted for Ron Paul if he had been the nominee?

Will you vote for anyone who secures a Republican nomination regardless of what they actually stand for?

How about if they oppose your positions on the ten issues that you would call the most important?

If you will vote for anyone whop gets a Republican nomination, exactly why, what exactly do you expect to get from that?

[MDspinboyredux]

So what's your solution? A third party and a permanent minority?

"Make" the GOP listen? How? Everything you say indicates they don't anyway?

As I said, NO CANDIDATE IS PERFECT on ALL ISSUES, but at least on the ones we don't agree on we'll have a seat at the discussion table as opposed to having a Democratic President and sitting out in the weeds letting the likes of Harry "We're going to lose" Ried and Nancy "Husband makes a lot of cash off me" Pelosi make decisions for us.

[MDspinboyredux]

Ron Paul didn't get the nomination, so that is an irrelevant question.

You find a candidate that wins the majority of Republican primary votes and we'll talk.

I personally didn't like McCain but he WAS the nominee. And he'd be a lot better than what we have now, IMO.

"what exactly do you expect to get from that?

ACCESS

[ThomasSawyer]

The GOP won’t listen as long as conservatives allow themselves to be led around by the nose with the threat that if we don’t vote for any old RINO the GOP puts before us, we’ll get stuck with a dem. I and many conservatives like me voted for the McCain ticket and we still ended up losing the White House and the remaining chamber of Congress. I don’t expect to agree with a candidate on everything. However, I do have core principles that I won’t compromise just because someone has an ‘R’ by their name. Republicans are not going to win elections trying to be like Democrats. Democrats have had too much practice at it. Besides, winning elections by tossing out ones principles is not really winning at all. As far as talk of a “permanent minority” that’s up to the GOP.

[MDspinboyredux]

WE are the "GOP", my friend. And the reason McCain was the nominee was because he got more Republican votes than any other Republican candidate (Dem crossovers notwithstanding).

For the record I didn't like McCain either and didn't vote for him in the Primary, but I did vote for him in the General because he was better than the alternative (and I think circumstances are bearing that out, don't you think?)

Talk of "the monolithic GOP" did this-or-that only provides people with an excuse not to take responsibility for their votes.

It's like a child who doesn't get to be the pitcher in a sandlot game and takes the ball home, only to find some other kid has a ball. He's not only not the pitcher, but now he isn't even playing.

I'm talking to the "Republicans" who voted third-party in the last election. IMO, they're just as bad as any Dem because they're just as responsible for our current President.

[ThomasSawyer]

"WE are the "GOP", my friend. And the reason McCain was the nominee was because he got more Republican votes than any other Republican candidate (Dem crossovers notwithstanding)."

I'm not a Republican, I'm a conservative. There's a big difference these days. Regarding McCain's nomination; you can't simply dismiss the Dem crossovers nor can you dismiss the influence the inside-the-Beltway GOP and the MSM had on the Republican nomination process.

For the record I didn't like McCain either and didn't vote for him in the Primary, but I did vote for him in the General because he was better than the alternative (and I think circumstances are bearing that out, don't you think?)

Of course McCain would have been a better alternative than the marxist that's in there now (that and Palin are why I voted for him) But, I believe his election would have only postponed the inevitable and lead to a much more "moderate"(liberal) influence over the GOP unless Palin were allowed by McCain's staff to have a freer hand than she did in the campaign.

It's like a child who doesn't get to be the pitcher in a sandlot game and takes the ball home, only to find some other kid has a ball. He's not only not the pitcher, but now he isn't even playing.

If you want to win the game, you let the kid that's the best pitcher pitch. Besides, not only is there a segment of the GOP that doesn't want conservatives to be allowed to pitch, they want to bench us indefinitely. I have always thought that the primaries were where these kinds of fights should take place, but given the undue influence of crossover democrats and various inside-the-beltway GOP folks (Orin hatch's recent comments regarding Toomey being a great illustration)just what are conservatives supposed to do; hang around the GOP bench election after election to see if we get to be the bat boy?