Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
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 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 501-526 next last
To: CharlesWayneCT; Antoninus; ejonesie22; colorcountry
You are a poster who has no direct access to information, who bases his opinion on misinterpreted jokes made to CAMPAIGN DONATION callers, and what he reads on the internet.

Read minds much, CW? WOW, I can't believe how out of sorts you are just because we don't all fall in lock-step and adore your hero (or employer?) Mitt.

201 posted on 01/31/2008 12:03:02 PM PST by greyfoxx39 (Salvation is NOT a value-added enterprise by making you pay for it. Christ gives it away free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; CharlesWayneCT; All
For me I could care less about Mitt’s Conservatism now.

Even if I was to say “Hey, I believe him now” or “He has been ok on a few issues, what the hell” it will not change the biggest factor of all, he won’t win in the General. Florida has proved that.

McCain may lose his mind or maybe just lose period elevating Romney to the nomination, it does not matter. We have expended energy on a man that will cause as much as 8-10% of the voters from at least two parts of the base at home. If you look at the numbers from 2000 and 2004 which will still be about the same for 2008, even losing 2-3% of the base through people not voting will kill us.

Mitt’s issue is not beating Hillary or Obama, but winning what should be “slam dunk” votes from the core of Republican support. In essence Mitt beats himself.

So his Conservatism or lack there of is totally irrelevant now.

I wish it were not so.

202 posted on 01/31/2008 12:03:16 PM PST by ejonesie22 (Haley Barbour 2012, Because he has experience in Disaster Recovery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: redgirlinabluestate

“Come on. Real world now. We are talking about those who have a chance at actually getting the nomination. It’s too late to play the single-issue perfection game already.”

Correct, and in that real world NE liberal puke Romney will lose in all the red states!

Huckabilly will likely wind up with more delegates than Mutt next Tues!


203 posted on 01/31/2008 12:03:53 PM PST by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: lady lawyer

““Is everyone here crazy? Can you not see that the next president may appoint 2 Supreme Court justices...this will change the make-up of the Court for years to come.”

Some are so blinded by their hatred of Mormons that they can’t see anything. It’s no accident that many of the people who immediately hopped on this thread to call Romney names are the same people who show up on anti-Mormon threads making vicious comments.

Mark Levin is right.

Romney is a decent man who has lived an exemplary life. He is no sleaze. I didn’t support him at first because of some of his past positions, but I do now. He has come around. Yet, some here persist in trying to demonize him.”

Well said!


204 posted on 01/31/2008 12:04:07 PM PST by Gator113 (McCain will lead our country....into the valley of darkness, with Hillary holding our hand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
I believe that we could say Bush doesn't like illegal immigration either. That hasn't translated to any action. I've never heard him defend it, and he states he wants to stop it. The throngs still flow.

Not unless you are calling him a liar. Although I would call him "flexibly opportunistic," I haven't seen indication of that.

Have you seen him say he would build a wall, or otherwise take immediate action to control the border. I haven't. If I had, I guess you could claim I was calling him a liar, but I haven't seen it.

I just don't see him taking definitive action any more than Bush has.

205 posted on 01/31/2008 12:04:31 PM 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 172 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
You make a good point *if* the messenger in question actually believes in and can be trusted to fight for the platform. In this case, I have a sneaking suspicion - backed by evidence - that the messenger's platform is merely a transitory tool.

I argue that we're already in trouble if the spokesman for conservative principles is a transparent phony. Our mistrust has more basis in reality and record than Romney's two-year old devotion to conservatism.

206 posted on 01/31/2008 12:04:37 PM PST by manapua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Gator113

Have you looked at Romney’s record on nominees for the MA court?


207 posted on 01/31/2008 12:05:40 PM PST by manapua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Fudd Fan

Mitt’s got my vote here in Manhattan. Will see if I can work my charm Sunday at a Super Bowl bash. ;)


208 posted on 01/31/2008 12:06:12 PM PST by Miss Didi ("Good heavens, woman, this is a war not a garden party!" Dr. Meade, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: papasmurf

“I would like to see more FReepers stick to their principles, rather than their strategy.”

Are you a mind reader or what? How do you know that people who support Mitt Romney aren’t sticking to their principles? The arrogance of someone like you is tiresome.


209 posted on 01/31/2008 12:06:42 PM PST by Minn. 4 Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: meandog
Could he actually be the dirtbag that everyone who really gets close to him say he is?

no, it is they suffer from one of the deadly sins, ENVY. McCain and Huck are vile, jealous petty men. There are both examples of scum rising to the top. God willing, enough citizens will wake up and vote Mitt over the nutty McCain. I trust Mitt over McCain any day. McCain will NEVER get my vote.

210 posted on 01/31/2008 12:06:54 PM PST by sand88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

I think FDT looked tired and uninspired. I don’t know if that was a byproduct of jumping in late. To me that didn’t make the difference. It looked like he got lost in the shuffle
Now if Mitt wants him to be his running mate, GREAT!


211 posted on 01/31/2008 12:07:14 PM PST by cleveland gop (In these times we must hold to OUR CONSERVATIVE VALUES. Anythlng else just won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

I think FDT looked tired and uninspired. I don’t know if that was a byproduct of jumping in late. To me that didn’t make the difference. It looked like he got lost in the shuffle
Now if Mitt wants him to be his running mate, GREAT!


212 posted on 01/31/2008 12:07:27 PM PST by cleveland gop (In these times we must hold to OUR CONSERVATIVE VALUES. Anythlng else just won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

I think FDT looked tired and uninspired. I don’t know if that was a byproduct of jumping in late. To me that didn’t make the difference. It looked like he got lost in the shuffle
Now if Mitt wants him to be his running mate, GREAT!


213 posted on 01/31/2008 12:07:42 PM PST by cleveland gop (In these times we must hold to OUR CONSERVATIVE VALUES. Anythlng else just won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Tirian

Thanks. COntinuing your thoughts,

And doesn’t it seem pretty silly to vote in a way that puts a democrat in office, and loses us the supreme court for another 30 years, thus 30 more years of killing babies, all because the candidate who can win on our side who will appoint GOOD judges USED to be on the wrong side of the issue?

“But we can’t vote for Romney, he has the blood of 47 million dead babies on his hands”. I don’t buy that argument, but if you do, if you really believe that not acting to stop abortion puts the blood of the innocents on you, how could you possibly vote in a way that is guaranteed to put pro-roe judges on the bench, when Romney has promised to put pro-life judges on the bench, and has the legal team backing him up to PROVE IT.

In order for a person to say they don’t trust Romney, they must also not trust the people Romney has advising him on the courts. And that is one trust-worthy bunch, as a lot of them used to be on Fred Thompson’s team.

They knew that Romney could be trusted on the issue, and that is why they joined him.

I expect the “destroy the country to teach a lesson” crowd will now suggest that all these great people were bought off, because no reputation is too great for these narrow-minded people to trash in defense of their indefensible position.


214 posted on 01/31/2008 12:08:19 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Delacon

Does anybody have any thoughts about Romney running as an Independent if McSnake snakes his way into the nomination?

After all, Romney has enough money to hang in there. By August, a lot can happen and he may develop a large following. The only issue is splitting the Republican vote, but it might be an even 3-way race with moderate DemoCraps being drawn away from Hitlery to McCain so HillBillery wouldn’t get a majority.

Thoughts anyone?


215 posted on 01/31/2008 12:08:32 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 1 | View Replies]

To: Minn. 4 Bush

I dare say, that if one’s principles were aligned with Myth Romney’s, they wouldn’t find much happiness on Freerepublic.


216 posted on 01/31/2008 12:08:39 PM PST by papasmurf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

“Huckabilly will likely wind up with more delegates than Mutt next Tues!”

Wanna make a friendly wager?


217 posted on 01/31/2008 12:09:14 PM PST by Minn. 4 Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: princess leah

That’s pretty bad. I don’t like them, but I won’t be praying with you for them to die. That’s really bad.


218 posted on 01/31/2008 12:10:16 PM PST by tgslTakoma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Deb
I like it how no one has mentioned that a Romney has never, in 200 years defended, served or worn a uniform of America.

I don’t know if they are selfish, cowardly, ‘just happen to be busy’ for 200 years, or anti-military. Certainly patriotic and Noble sacrifice isn’t a family trait.

219 posted on 01/31/2008 12:11:08 PM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Minn. 4 Bush

Sure, I’ll bet ya a Million bucks that its likely, just as I said.

You lose, pay up!


220 posted on 01/31/2008 12:12:14 PM PST by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: papasmurf

“I dare say, that if one’s principles were aligned with Myth Romney’s, they wouldn’t find much happiness on Freerepublic.”

Well, not on this nasty, vile thread (sounds kinda like McCains personality). But I find alot of happiness on Free Republic. You should read the live debate thread from last night - lot’s of good natured, happy folks.


221 posted on 01/31/2008 12:12:55 PM PST by Minn. 4 Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: icwhatudo

I love that cartoon!


222 posted on 01/31/2008 12:13:04 PM PST by ruination
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Fudd Fan

Hi Fudd thank you so much.


223 posted on 01/31/2008 12:14:01 PM PST by Brandie (1st for Hunter, then gone, VOTED for Fred then he is gone. Now for Romney! and NO to McCain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Cecily

Actually, their endorsement is looking pretty good right now. the NRTL threw their endorsement away on Thompson because he was “the most electable”, and he couldn’t even take 2nd place in either of the states he staked his campaign on.

Others endorsed other candidates who never made it anywhere. But Romney could still win the nomination, and be a solid conservative spokesperson who will win election and guide our country in a conservative direction.

Put away the fear. Restore your faith, if not in a person, in the large number of people who are trustworthy and have been long advocates for our cause who have spoken personally with Romney, have thought long and hard, and decided that Romney CAN be trusted.

Or, you could believe a few Freeper posters who have no such direct knowledge. At this point, that’s what it comes down to, who do you trust.

Do you trust McCain to NOT do what he promises, or Romney to do what he promises.

Do you trust Leiberman and the New York Times? OR do you trust Mark Levin, and Jim DeMint?

I spoken to people I trust, who have had direct contact with Romney, and they tell me he is solidly on our side. Why should I trust some freeper I don’t know, over the direct personal testimony of someone I know and trust?


224 posted on 01/31/2008 12:14:04 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Delacon
I don't always agree with Mark, Rush, Shawn or Coulter on only a couple issues, mostly social, but we are in total conservative agreement on the big issues and the future of the movement.

Today I received the usual national Republican poll that the NRCC sends out as a disguised fund raiser every year. Over the past two weeks,a flood of endorsements for McCain have come from the people who run these organizations and the GOP. I threw the poll and the request for money in the trash unopened. I will do so in perpetuity until the GOP and the NRCC once again take my views seriously and by this flood of GOP insiders endorsing McCain, I don't believe they are. I am convinced that they are cutting off the Conservative segment of the party in order to win a shallow victory with a bad candidate.

I would much prefer that if the country is to be trashed by a bad republican, that it happen with a democrat in charge, and not us.

I can only ope that Romney can counter McCain's lies and distortions of the truth, and wrest the nomination from him,but if that is not in the cards, I promise you that I will act on my views, and will not vote for the nominee.

This pledge given on this day will be acted on when the time comes.

225 posted on 01/31/2008 12:14:16 PM PST by Cold Heat (Mitt....2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manapua

That article speaks to a man who follows the law. Sorry, there’s a lot of “conservatives” who think the law should be ignored when we disagree with it. But that’s not how it works.


226 posted on 01/31/2008 12:15:00 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: tabsternager

Happy reading

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53598


227 posted on 01/31/2008 12:15:05 PM 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 163 | View Replies]

To: Leisler

Of course, they haven’t crashed any jets either. At least you’re reasonable.


228 posted on 01/31/2008 12:15:43 PM PST by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

“Sure, I’ll bet ya a Million bucks that its likely, just as I said.
You lose, pay up!”

Really? You got a million? Somehow I don’t quite believe it. Plus the you lose, pay up part - you do know that February 5th hasn’t happened yet - don’t you?


229 posted on 01/31/2008 12:16:21 PM PST by Minn. 4 Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Here is a piece about McCain and the fairness doctrine.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1962643/posts


230 posted on 01/31/2008 12:17:07 PM PST by JRochelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mister Politics

It would be nice to know if that’s true. All we know now is that he doesn’t appeal to moderates and liberals as much as McCain does. We DON’T know if he would appeal to them more than Hillary or Obama.

BTW, have you seen any exit polls which indicate where the black vote is going? I bet Romney is doing well with them, but I haven’t seen that breakdown. They did show that hispanics really went for McCain.


231 posted on 01/31/2008 12:17:27 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: lady lawyer
Romney is a decent man who has lived an exemplary life. He is no sleaze. I didn’t support him at first because of some of his past positions, but I do now. He has come around. Yet, some here persist in trying to demonize him.

Well stated, deserves repeating. Having observed Mitt and McCain in the debates, it is obvious that Mitt has the temperament and integrity to be a good President. McCain comes across as a petty, vengeful, envious, bitter old man.

232 posted on 01/31/2008 12:17:50 PM PST by sand88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Romney is a conservative

Biggest damn lie ever. Don't piss down my leg and tell me it's raining.

233 posted on 01/31/2008 12:17:50 PM PST by Graybeard58 ( Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Delacon

234 posted on 01/31/2008 12:18:08 PM PST by Uri’el-2012 (you shall know that I, YHvH, your Savior, and your Redeemer, am the Elohim of Ya'aqob. Isaiah 60:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Worldnutdaily? I’d rather take Romney’s record, thanks.


235 posted on 01/31/2008 12:19:18 PM PST by tabsternager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: jan in Colorado
I think that conservatives ARE NOT voting for McCain. It's the independents (who for the most part are liberal)the senior citizens (go figure), and the immigrants who want open borders, who are giving McCain the slight, and I mean very slight edge.

Good point. Two-thirds of Republican primary voters are NOT voting for him. It's the MSM, RINOS and party-before-country folks who are pushing McCain on us.

236 posted on 01/31/2008 12:19:21 PM PST by tgslTakoma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
I expect the “destroy the country to teach a lesson” crowd will now suggest that all these great people were bought off, because no reputation is too great for these narrow-minded people to trash in defense of their indefensible position

The "scorched earth" tactics of the Romney attackers is counterproductive, and will result in The Beast gaining office. She will raise taxes by record amounts, and establish socialist programs that will be irreversible.

Not even Reagan could haul in Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare spending. To think a saviour in 2012 will do so is absurd.

237 posted on 01/31/2008 12:20:05 PM PST by dashing doofus (Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle

Wow, I found that quite surprising. I appreciate the ping and link.


238 posted on 01/31/2008 12:20:35 PM 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 230 | View Replies]

To: Minn. 4 Bush

“Really? You got a million? Somehow I don’t quite believe it. Plus the you lose, pay up part - you do know that February 5th hasn’t happened yet - don’t you?”

Its easy to see how you would be a Romney supporter if you are dumb enough to bet that something isn’t LIKELY!


239 posted on 01/31/2008 12:20:42 PM PST by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: lormand; Antoninus

The problem with McCain is that his guiding “principle” is that he wants people to love him. So he does what will get the most people to love him. And when that makes some people NOT love him, rather than accepting that he can’t be loved by everybody, he lashes out, because by blaming those people for NOT loving him, he can say it’s not HIS fault they don’t love him, they are just evil people.

Just like when he fell into the Keating-5 scandal, his response was to tell the nation that EVERY politician was corrupt and untrustworthy, but that HE HAd seen the light and would pass laws to protect us from the whole lot of untrustworthy evil political class.

In other words, he personally broke the law, but rather than acknowledge he had a personal flaw, he told the world that EVERYBODY was just as bad as him, only worse because they wouldn’t admit it.


240 posted on 01/31/2008 12:21:04 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Zevonismymuse

You are so lucky. I would love to meet him. I’d really love to sit down with him for 15 minutes and ask him some tough questions.


241 posted on 01/31/2008 12:21:56 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Delacon

It’s got to be Romney.

If it’s The Beast or Hussein, the Dems win.
If it’s McCain, the Dems win. When the NYT endorses McCain, you know the fix is in.

The only way out of this is hold your nose and vote Romney. Of course, if McCain wins the nomination, we’re screwed.


242 posted on 01/31/2008 12:22:03 PM PST by toddlintown (Building More Highways For Children---Huckleberry Talking Point)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tabsternager

That’s what I tought. ROTFLMAO

Be sure and keep those blinders properly adjusted.


243 posted on 01/31/2008 12:22:04 PM 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 235 | View Replies]

To: manapua

The jerks at National Review deserve what they are getting.

I was reminded about this by an email Laura Ingraham read this morning.

NR was one of the worst bashers of George Allen in 2006, heck they were no better than the Washington Post.

Kathryn Lopez knew that Allen would be a serious competitor of Mitt’s in the campaign for President.
She is so in love with Mitt, she decided her and bunch needed to take Allen out for her Mittster.

Well I am sure enjoying all her moaning and weeping now.
I am laughing 24/7.


244 posted on 01/31/2008 12:23:07 PM PST by JRochelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: manapua; Antoninus; DoughtyOne; JRochelle; Petronski; Cicero

Here’s where it all hits bottom:

Levin’s right. Mitt Romney IS more Conservative than McCain.

If Romney had been the Senator from Arizona these last many years we wouldn’t have:
Romney-Feingold
Romney-Kennedy
Romney-Leiberman
...

Mitt Romeny would not have been a “Gang of 14” instigator, nor even a participant.

Mitt Romney would not have opposed President Bush’s tax cuts.

On the core issue of our times, I believe that Mitt Romney will stay the course in Iraq, and hold firm in our global march against terrorists, and terrorist organizations.

Further, I’ll go out on a limb and assert that Mitt Romney will prove to be a better friend to Israel than G. W. Bush has been.

Is Romney perfect? HA! No, nobody is, but McCain is WORSE! WAY worse.

Romeny can at least openly discuss how his thinking has changed on issues. Romney can comfortably admit that he’s been wrong in the past.

McCain, when asked point-blank about past mistakes, can’t even begin to get his mouth to form the words. He hems and haws, stutters, stammers, and does pirouettes all the way around Robin Hood’s barn before petering out in a stinking bog of evasion and mealy-mouthed equivocation.

Tell me honestly, do you REALLY want that in a President??

I came from the far right end of the Conservative bench, and I was rooting for someone more pincipled than Romeny. None of those guys are left, but, of the three credible candidates that remain, Romney is THE MOST conservative, the most mentally stable, the most genuine as a person — he’s not 100% in any area, but hes at least 80% across the board. He’s got negatives in his past, but they’re not the egregious, national, Constitution-subsuming negatives that MCCain has “blessed” us with.

I also think there’s a great deal of credibility to the argument that the MSM likes McCain because he’s NOT conservative, and they understand that if he wins the GOP nomination, he’ll be cannon fodder. Heck, he and Hillary are such buds up in the Senate, that if they’re both nominated by the respective parties, this could turn into the most lovey-dovey Presidential campaign in U.S. History. And, BOY would the country be UNITED, again. All of the alphabet orgs on the left could just take the whole election cycle off, because it wouldn’t matter all that much to them who won. All the usual divisiveness would be gone from the campaign... The whole thing would play out like a college bowl game, except that the last play will feature McCain and Hillary in a Shakespearean “et tu, Brute” moment, and we’ll be inaugurating Hillary on 1-20-09.

THAT is what you will get if McCain becomes the GOP nominee.


245 posted on 01/31/2008 12:23:30 PM PST by HKMk23 (AUT VINCERI AUT MORI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

Did you finish the 5th grade?


246 posted on 01/31/2008 12:24:32 PM PST by Minn. 4 Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: meowmeow

Jimmy Carter didn’t get to pick 2 supreme court justices.

But there are a few people here who blame Romney for killing babies, but their “solution” is to allow another “jimmy carter” to come and appoint to liberal justices that will set back the chance to overturn roe by 30 years — another 30 years of slaughter, when we are THIS close to winning.

At this point, given the alternatives, to reject a conservative platform and give up 30 years of Roe simply because the candidate used to believe differently is a catostrophic choice.

But one that a few people here are not only happy to make, but are pushing everybody else to make as well.

When we end abortion, a million babies a year will grow up to thank us.


247 posted on 01/31/2008 12:25:17 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: tgslTakoma
Yep. The media keeps reporting that McCain is the only one that can beat Hillery. Not only is that not true, but if he did beat her, what would be the difference? Not much. I will not vote for him under any circumstances.

When I hear that there are Republicans that are voting for him because he is the only one that can win, it just makes me crazy.

Good to see you tgs.

248 posted on 01/31/2008 12:25:35 PM PST by jan in Colorado ("It's easier to believe a lie one hears 1,000 times than to believe a fact that one has never heard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: HKMk23

I think some of you are operating under a false assumption.

I do not support John McCain because he is basically a democrat.

I do not support Romney for the same reason.

Add Giuliani, Huckabee, and even Paul in there on some issues.

I agree with most of your comments. Is Romney better than McCain? I believe so in some ways. I’m remain unconvinced in others.


249 posted on 01/31/2008 12:26:53 PM 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 245 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Tell me how many more democrats we’ll have when McCain grants amnesty by executive order.


250 posted on 01/31/2008 12:27:50 PM PST by abigailsmybaby (I was born with nothing. So far I have most of it left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 501-526 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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