Posted on 01/31/2008 12:11:06 PM PST by Checkers
McCain has been carrying water for Soros since at least 1996. Soros funds McCain’s projects and campaigns through his 527’s, and in return, McCain pushes all the liberal wet dream projects on the Republican side (like McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Lieberman, etc.) Specter gets a lot of his campaign $ from the Main Street Republican fund that Soros and Theresa Heinz underwrite to prop up all the liberal Republicans.
Last Clear Chance.
Vote for Mitt.
Stop McCain.
Stop Amnesty.
Or you get what you deserve.
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/
Yes he did.
McCain: “I’m proud of Judge O’Connor as a fellow Arizonan. ... I’m not going to second guess President Reagan.”
The only way to stop McCain now is to present Huckabee with a document stating that under no circumstances will he accept a VP slot for McCain. See if he refuses to sign, and publicize it.
The millions of dead babies will get your message loudly and clearly.
Nobody think McCain did well, except a few in-the-tank for mcCain folks ...
http://www.mediacynic.com/cgi-bin/mediacynic.pl?cynic=131081
The Republicans held their last debate before Super Tuesday last night at the Reagan Library in California. Governor Schwarzenegger, Nancy Reagan and Kelsey Grammar (he’s a Republican?) were in attendance. The candidates were seated in front of Reagan’s old aircraft, which gave the scene a surreal air — like they were on a movie set or something.
This was not McCain’s best night. He answered a question about why he’s qualified to run the economy with a rambling speech about his war service and his experiences as a POW. He reiterated that he served “for patriotism, not profit” which is fine if you’re talking about a war, but to diss the concept of profits at a Republican debate is the equivalent of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton announcing plans for three more, unspecified wars in the middle of the Democratic debate. The audience was not amused and McCain looked really out of touch. He seemed peevish and small tonight. He nearly drove Mitt Romney crazy by harping on some comment about “timetables” in Iraq. Every major newspaper backs Mitt Romney’s version of what he said, but McCain is like a terrier with a bone, droning on and on and on about it. This prompted Ron Paul (who was having the best debate of his entire life) to cry foul, saying “Oh, for Pete’s sake! You both agree that you love the war and want to stay in Iraq forever, so let’s get on with some real policy debates — like why we are in a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 that is going to bankrupt our country!” (I’m paraphrasing here.) That got big audience applause.
Huckabee’s jokey, car salesman act is wearing really thin and he kept whining that no one was asking him any questions. The concept that Rudy Guiliani is out of the race, but that this guy is still in is an amazing thing.
The best moment of the night is when Anderson Cooper pointed to Ronald Reagan’s actual diary like it was the Old Testament and read Reagan’s entry from the day he nominated (pro-choice) Sandra Day O’Connor to the Supreme Court. Reagan said that the “pro-life people are really coming after me....Sandra will make a great justice.” Coop then asked each candidate would he have nominated O’Connor? They all said they would nominate pro-life judges like Alito and Roberts. But the point was made — despite what the revisionists would like us to think, Reagan appointed the swing vote that kept Roe vs. Wade the law of the land. That’s all going to change if any of these candidates is elected, as they have just vehemently promised.
But the winner of the debate was Ron Paul for his answer to the question put to each of the candidates: “Would Ronald Reagan endorse you?” Paul said that he doesn’t know what Reagan would do if he were alive today, but that Reagan did personally campaign for him in 1978. (Ronald Reagan helped launch Ron Paul’s political career which would later come back to bedevil Republican candidates in 2008? The irony!) The thuds we all heard were the other candidates jaws hitting the floor. Paul then followed up with the nugget that President Reagan personally told him that any country that went off the gold standard would head into economic ruin. It was a glorious day in Ron Paul City.
“Just curious - how many Republican lawyers do you think there are in Massachusetts? And how many of them do you think want to leave their lucrative careers for crappy salaries as judges? Do you know how insignificant a job as a state court judge is if you are a high powered litigator at a firm like Goodwin Procter?”
No he doesnt. He doesnt care. Nor does he care that these judges had no real importance on constitutional matters. Nor does he care that Romney had to deal with a Democrat review board and a nomination process that tried to get the partisan politics out of the process.
This is all about stopping the moneyed mormon. Any distortion, lie or piece of junk will do.
RINO MCCAIN DOESNT FIT - VOTE FOR MITT - Another Conservative for Mitt!
Not exactly a poll or a focus group or an objective account that you posted. You know I’m not a McCain supporter so I’m just calling it as I saw it. Not what Romney or Huckabee needed to dislodge McCain as front runner, in my opinion. I know the attempt to spin the post debate perceptions is often important but . . .
“The only way to stop McCain now is to present Huckabee with a document stating that under no circumstances will he accept a VP slot for McCain. See if he refuses to sign, and publicize it.”
Huckster wont sign it, of course.
There’s more ...
http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/lies_and_the_lying_liars_who_tell_them
Wednesday night, John McCain looked small.
I suppose that I can understand if McCain is feeling upset over the fact that he was the target of a number of negative ads from Mitt Romney. But after watching his performance during the debate at the Reagan Library, I can’t say that I feel all that sympathetic. Maybe I should, but I don’t.
...
Just to be absolutely clear about this, there is no way that any fair minded person could watch Romney’s comments and conclude that he was using the word “timetables” in the same way that the Democrats were using it and with the intention to bring about a precipitous withdrawal. The quote above and the video could not possibly be more explicit on the topic.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/31/breaking-romney-makes-major-super-tuesday-ad-buy/
“That’s funny. I remember when he ran for congressman in 1982, and he didn’t have clean hands then or at any time afterward. He was always the nasty, vindictive, sneering little man we saw last night.”
There’s more - Powerline:
http://www.neoconnews.com/2008/01/31/mccain-pile-on-blogger-style/
Why is it a problem that Mitt Romney didn’t take a position on the surge in December 2006, when he was governor of Massachusetts? At that time, he hadn’t been to Iraq and he had not been briefed on the subject. He also lacked access to classified information. Nor can Romney be blamed for not having become an expert on Iraq. Being governor of Massachusetts is, after all, a full time job.
I suppose Romney could have relied on some combination of prejudice and the views of others. But, while this may be sufficient for bloggers and pundits, it’s not a sound basis for decisionmaking about whether to send 30,000 more troops into harm’s way. Romney did not take a position until he had studied the situation, and I think that’s to his credit.
John McCain rarely lets lack of information and expertise stand in his way. Iraq, of course, is a notable exception. McCain frequently visited Iraq and consulted with everyone he could. For this, and because he found the right answer, he deserves the great credit he claims.
But what about McCain’s other positions? He opposes drilling in ANWR because, in his words, the area is “pristine” (which in this case means barren) and he “wouldn’t drill in the Grand Canyon.” Has any candidate ever presented a less serious analysis of an important policy question?
He opposes waterboarding in part because “torture doesn’t work.” Maybe the things the North Vietnamese did to him at the Hanoi Hilton didn’t work, but we know from eye-witness accounts that waterboarding worked. When I asked McCain about this, he essentially accused the CIA of lying.
McCain’s tendency to make snap judgments based on prejudice rather than information, and his hostility to information that doesn’t conform to his prejudices, is perhaps the most frightening aspect of candidacy. It is also the most stark difference between McCain and Romney, outstripping any substantive disagreements in my view…
Then he said BUT I would appoint judges like Roberts and Scalia. Why do you have to manipulate his words? I think there’s enough to complain about without making stuff up. He didn’t want to trash Judge O’Connor. So what.
If you wnat to stop McCain the only hope is to rally around Romney.
Here is a california poll:
Rasmussen 01/29 - 01/29 652 LV
Mccain 32
Romney 28
Huckabee 11
If Huckabee supporters join up with Romney, Romney wins.
If Huckabee supporters do not, McCain wins.
Third place in polls does NOT give you any delegates. A huck vote in california and most of the other states are wasted votes in the sense that it will only give the delegates to mccain.
There will not be a brokered convention.
It wasn’t a question. It was a statement. Here is another statement. I think Romney’s judicial appointment history automatically disqualifies him from consideration for President. If others want to wilfully blind themselves to it, then that’s their choice. I’m not voting for Romney under any circumstances.
You are the one manipulating. The comment you replied to said:
“Well, McCain said last night that Justice O’Connor was great by him.”
And you disputed it, but he had only kind words for her is what I was pointing out. That’s all.
As for the substance at issue:
Yes, he said he would appoint Alito. But at another time, he dissed Alito:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/is_mccain_a_conservative.html
McCain has Warren Rudman advising him on these matters. You may want to look up Warren Rudman’s involvement in SCOTUS appointees - he gave us ... Souter!
Then there is the gang of 14.
There was nothing from McCain’s actions to suggest that an O’Connor type nomination would be an impossibility.
“I am not for or against McCain but I have a heartburn with news guys making claims that they know they can’t back and second or 3rd hand info at that.
I’ve heard so much of that crap that mostly comes from the left wing press. I hate stuff being said that you just can’t verify.”
Both John Fund and Bob Novak have verified it...
Case closed.
“The problem is that McCain and Romney are equally lousy on judges. Lets not forget Romneys liberal appointments, including a gay rights activist and another who was an abortion activist.”
That’s probably why Judge Bork, Jay Sekulow and Jim Bopp support Romney...
...rolls eyes...
The dispute was that McCain would want a judge such as O’Connor, which is not what he said, and you know it. Go back and listen to his response. Even Dennis Prager said this morning that McCain said “BUT” and it didn’t take a genius to figure out that he was kindly rejecting a selection like O’Connor. He didn’t want to trash her or President Reagan, who did put her on the court.
If you would have read my post, you would know that he willfully blinded himself and the nomination process, he reformed the system so the nominee’s names were not attached to their applications and they were chosen by a 21 person committee based strictly on merit. He all but pulled himself completely out of the process. And frankly, Victoria Toensing and Bork’s endorsements...not to mention the other conservatives willing to serve on his new Constitution Committee...are good enough for me. Sorry, but I think you are being blind yourself on this one.
“The dispute was that McCain would want a judge such as O’Connor”
And there is nothing in McCain’s long career that suggests he wouldn’t nominate a justice like her, despite his ‘but’ comment. That’s what you are unwilling to admit.This man voted for ginsburg and then ...
““‘Wouldn’t it be great if you get a chance to name somebody like Roberts and Alito?’ one lawyer commented. McCain replied, ‘Well, certainly Roberts.’ Jaws were described as dropping. My sources cannot remember exactly what McCain said next, but their recollection is that he described Alito as too conservative.””
Wake up and smell the coffee. Mr McCain-Kennedy knows how to ‘work across the aisle’ and in 1999 discounted wanting to repeal Roe v Wade.
JOE SCARBOROUGH on MCCAIN: Let me tell you what a conservative is not:
A conservative is not a man that calls tax cuts that George Bush passed that revived the economy “tax cuts for the rich.” That is not a conservative.
A conservative is not a man who is one of two Republicans standing alone in Washington, DC voting against those tax cuts that every other Republican supported in Washington, DC. That is not a conservative.
A conservative is not a man that teams up with Teddy Kennedy to produce a bill that is nothing short of amnesty that would allow 12 million illegal immigrants to attain legal status the day after John McCain’s bill and Ted Kennedy’s bill becomes law. That is not a conservative.
A conservative is not somebody that goes on Tim Russert’s show a couple of weeks ago and says if that amnesty bill that would allow 12 million illegal immigrants to become citizens [legal residents] the next day, he does not go on that show and say “yes, I would sign that bill, but don’t worry, it’s not going to come to my desk.” That is not a conservative.
A conservative is not a man who says he wants to increase taxes maybe 50 cents per gallon on the American people, trying to push through a bill that the rest of the world won’t sign onto. That is not a conservative.
Concluded Scarborough: “I could go on forever and ever.”
“Not long ago the American people banded together and helped defeat amnesty. How could Senator John McCain possible become the leading GOP candidate with his radical amnesty votes, left wing leanings, and his poor health. Yesterday he fidgeted and twisted and giggled and talked to himself like a nut.
There has to be something or somebody to help save us from this creep.”
That somebody is named Mitt Romney.
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.