Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rally for Romney: Conservatives need to act now, before it is too late.
National Review Online ^ | January 31, 2008 | Mark R. Levin

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 couldn’t win a general election, and opposing a sitting president. And at the time Reagan wasn’t 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 Reagan’s 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 don’t 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.

Let’s 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 McCain’s record? Is this the first campaign in which an opponent has run ads questioning another candidate’s record? That’s par for the course. To the best of my knowledge, Romney’s 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 McCain’s 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 Romney’s character doesn’t let him to cross certain boundaries of decorum and decency, but McCain’s 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 he’s gotten the message. Yet, when asked last night if he would sign the McCain-Kennedy bill as president, he dissembles, arguing that it’s a hypothetical question. Last Sunday on Meet the Press, he said he would sign the bill. There’s 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 media’s 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 weren’t accompanied by spending cuts. That’s simply not correct.


Even worse than denying his own record, McCain is flatly lying about Romney’s 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 it’s also irrefutable that McCain is abusing the English language (Romney’s 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 isn’t open to interpretation. But it does give us a window into who he is.


Of course, it’s 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 McCain’s 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? It’s 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 it’s fair to say that McCain’s positions are more in line with the ACLU than most conservatives.


Why recite this record? Well, if conservatives don’t 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 wouldn’t the prospect of a Clinton or Obama presidency drive enough of the grassroots to the polls for McCain? It wasn’t 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 won’t 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 won’t 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 doesn’t make a juggernaut. But the liberal media are promoting him now as the presumptive nominee. More and more establishment Republican officials are jumping on McCain’s bandwagon — the latest being Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has all but destroyed California’s Republican party.

Let’s 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 don’t 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.

TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: 2008; elections; hillarylite; marklevin; mccain; primaries; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-526 next last
To: Mogollon

Sorry, it’s too late and in all honesty, there is no way Romney could win. He appeals to no constituencies besides conservatives and upper income white males. I’m not excited about McCain either, but it’s time to get aboard and hope that he picks a conservative VP we can all get excited about.

101 posted on 01/31/2008 11:24:41 AM PST by Mister Politics (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: libbylu

Good tagline! ;-)

102 posted on 01/31/2008 11:25:24 AM PST by redgirlinabluestate (Unite 4 Mitt --- Stop McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: libbylu

Good tagline! ;-)

103 posted on 01/31/2008 11:25:24 AM PST by redgirlinabluestate (Unite 4 Mitt --- Stop McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
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.

The difference between us and you is that we know how to read.

Mitt Romney has a great record in everything he has done.
104 posted on 01/31/2008 11:25:26 AM PST by elizabetty ("Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm." .Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lady lawyer

Very well put.

105 posted on 01/31/2008 11:25:26 AM PST by Archon of the East (Universal Executive Power of the Law of Nature)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Mister Politics

In that case, Obama or Hillary already won.

106 posted on 01/31/2008 11:26:07 AM PST by Shadow44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Yeah, those damn "media conservatives" just don't get it.

We Conservatives must always try to please our critics, and John McCain is that man

What's all the fuss just because McCain "rarely" works with our critics. I mean, are we not a little selfish to demand things be done right and invoke leadership and principle, right from wrong when exercising legislative power.

Let's not ignore, but celebrate those wonderful compromises that McCain "rarely" executed.

Opposition to tax cuts
Giving Constitutional rights to terror detainees
Opposing interrogation techniques of terror detainees
Leading "Gang of 7" morons on caving into democRAT judicial demands
Accepts extremist environmental positions
constantly burns bridges with Conservatives, builds bridges with democRATS

107 posted on 01/31/2008 11:26:19 AM PST by lormand (Paulrhoids(TM) - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hattie

“Sent my few dollars to Mitt this morning.”

So did I.

108 posted on 01/31/2008 11:26:29 AM PST by tabsternager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I cannot believe how many people are willing to sacrifice their political credibility to throw their support behind men who have such sordid records.

Mitt Romney is a great man and will be a great leader. I met him and Ann yesterday and they are so real and decent.

109 posted on 01/31/2008 11:26:58 AM PST by Zevonismymuse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Delacon; holdonnow

Thank you, Mark Levin.

110 posted on 01/31/2008 11:27:07 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gunservative
sometimes things have to totally fall apart before you can build them back up again.

True. It took having a Carter to get us a Reagan.

On the down side, some things can never be put back together again. We may have reached that stage.

111 posted on 01/31/2008 11:27:23 AM PST by meowmeow (In Loving Memory of Our Dear Viking Kitty (1987-2006))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle

Well, why don’t you go through Mark’s argument, and do a point-by-point rebuttal showing how Romney is as bad as McCain? That’s the purpose of responding to an article after all, to debate the merits of the argument put forth.

112 posted on 01/31/2008 11:28:17 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: meowmeow

Carter did do a hell of a lot of damage too. Southeast Asia and the Middle East are all screwed up because of him to this day.

113 posted on 01/31/2008 11:28:59 AM PST by Shadow44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Be pragmatic.

You can vote for the guy who has always GOVERNED on our side or the guy who has fought against us every step of the way.

Romney was very well liked and has been endorsed by the pro-life, pro-family, no tax, pro-gun people who spend their lives working in Massachusetts.

You can call him names but the people who do not sit around on websites all day but are out here in the real world trying to make a difference like and support Romney.
114 posted on 01/31/2008 11:29:09 AM PST by elizabetty ("Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm." .Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Did he say anything you disagree with in his littany against McCain? Or do you argue that those items are not disqualifying?

If not, is there anything in Romney’s platform or his stump speeches or what he says in the debates or on the campaign trail that you find disqualifying for a conservative?

If not, are you going to vote in a way that will choose as our nominee the man with the flaws Mark points out, rather than the man who is running on a solid conservative platform?

Is fear that a candidate might be lying mean more to you than the actual spoken words of a candidate that is in opposition to conservative values?

115 posted on 01/31/2008 11:30:38 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

So anotherwords, we vote for a guy that will implement 50 to 75% of Hillary’s goals.

Look, at best Romney will hold the line on current illegal alien policy. Still more millions will pour across our borders and the next democrat will legalize them anyway.

Do you really think Romney will do anything more than cosmetic with regard to illegal immigration?

I don’t. He’s a business man. What has been the policy of big business with regard to illegal immigration?


116 posted on 01/31/2008 11:30:57 AM PST by DoughtyOne (PARTY WANTED: Full Time, Cons exp a must. Refs 20 yrs. No Amnesty sptrs. 1 vote per 4 yrs negotiable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Refute his points, don’t simply assert that you can.

117 posted on 01/31/2008 11:31:29 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: redgirlinabluestate

It appears that on Tuesday the great state of Montana will proudly commit its delegates for the next President of the United States, Mitt Romney!

118 posted on 01/31/2008 11:31:36 AM PST by claudiustg (Sic Semper Tyrannus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Delacon

Myth is as much Conservative as I am tall, dark, and handsome. :)

His past statements and positions line up and match exactly with his actions as Governor. Yet, people still want to believe, and make him out to be a Conservative.

It’s just more Mitt-ology from Myth Romney and Co.

119 posted on 01/31/2008 11:31:46 AM PST by papasmurf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elizabetty

120 posted on 01/31/2008 11:32:18 AM PST by DoughtyOne (PARTY WANTED: Full Time, Cons exp a must. Refs 20 yrs. No Amnesty sptrs. 1 vote per 4 yrs negotiable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-526 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
Topics · Post Article

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