Free Republic

Bingo.

While it is great that at least some Californians are starting to wake-up, that buries the real lede in this story, and that is the GENERATIONAL split. Obama won’t lose California no matter who the GOP puts up in 2012. What is really concerning, however, is Zero’s approval ratings by AGE, which portends doom for California - and quite possibly the country - in the future.

After many years of liberals controlling the education establishment and the culture (Think Jon Stewart, Hollywood, the MSM) - but even more as a result of California’s changing demographics, the difference in political views among the age groups is stark - and scary. Keep in mind, a majority of young people in California voted for Ronald Reagan just a generation ago. As horrendous as Obama has been, he will almost certainly win not only a substantial majority of younger Californians, but once again a substantial majority of younger voters nationally in 2012.

According to the poll, over 65 Californians disapprove of Obama 40 to 51%, while younger voters 18 to 29 APPROVE of his performance a whopping 53 to 35 percent. That generational split in approval further validates those of us who have opposed the naive, effectively open border” policies of GOP leaders like Bush, McCain, and others.

As the country’s demographics as a whole slowly but surely begin to mirror those of California, I see little evidence that these younger voters will vote any more “conservative” in the future. Very troubling indeed...

“Majority rule tactic”?!?

Gee, odd how “The Hill” and the rest of the MSM never used that phrase to describe Senate G.O.P. attempts to confirm President Bush’s judicial appointments by a simple majority...

I agree wholehartedly...even if Hayworth doesn’t win, he is doing conservatives a HUGE favor as it will force McCain to vote and act like a conservative the next few months - at a crucial time given the 59-41 partisan breakdown of the Senate. In particular, I think McCain will think twice before taking the lead on trying to help Obama pass an amnesty bill this Spring.

Win or lose, we will owe a debt of gratitude to Congressman Hayworth!!!

Agreed; I very much thank Gov. Gibbons for holding the line on taxes - However he is radioactive politically, and given his negatives even if he were to somehow win a split GOP primary he has little to no chance of holding the Governorship.

Fortunately, I think that Brian Sandoval becomes the odds on favorite, especially with Rory Reid having his father as an albatross around his neck.

Despite Gov. Gibbons’ stratospheric negatives, Sen. Ensign’s disgraceful affair, no GOP party organization to speak of, and the ACORN-funded surge in Democratic voters, 2010 is looking better and better. Obama’s dropping poll numbers, Sen. Reid’s dangerously high negative ratings, and an atmosphere becoming more and more conducive nationally for the GOP and it now looks like we have a good chance of holding the Governership AND potentially knocking off our abrasive, out-of-touch liberal Senator. Let’s hope things continue moving in our direction...

I have some experience with Nevada politics, and have no affiliation with any of the aforementioned candidates, so here is my candid assessment:

Congressman Dean Heller was the ideal candidate, but he already has (prematurely in my view) announced he is not running and is staying in his safe House seat - apparently no fire in the belly.

Brian Sandoval would be the next best candidate - but it looks for sure that he resigned his Federal Judicial position to run for Governor instead.

Sue Lowden is the most electable of the other names mentioned. She is telegenic, has won a state senate seat previously, an has access to BIG bucks through her husband Paul, who used to own the Sahara Hotel. All of those are big pluses. The downside is that she has been out of politics for a long time, her “grass roots” abilities are suspect, and her views might be a bit on the moderate side.

Danny Tarkanian has the famous name, and currently leads in polls. However, he is a less-than-compelling public speaker and has lost in two previous attempts at local and state offices - not an inspiring track record. The famous name obviously helps, but he will need to show more skill and savvy to beat a candidate who can be ruthless and will be spending upwards of $25 Million Dollars.

Sharon Angle is the most conservative of the candidates mentioned, and she is also a strong campaigner. She has, however, lost GOP primary races for State Senate and Congress, is from up North, and has little money or statewide name recognition.

Bottom line: At this point, I think that Sue Lowden is probably the strongest of the potential GOP candidates, and based on his defensive comments about her I think she is the candidate Sen. Reid fears the most as well...

Both you and Ninofan are correct. Everyone has to keep in mind that ALL of the candidates “the one” was considering were hardcore leftists and judicial activists; They are all extremely likely to vote in lockstep with the liberals on controversial cases and issues of import to conservatives;

That being said, Sotomayor was the “least bad” choice. LIBERALS think she is both intellectually and temperamentally unsuited for the Supreme Court. As such, I think the odds are that she will therefore likely have less influence in swaying Justice Kennedy (or any potential future swing Justice) than a smarter, more personable liberal activist (ala the late Justice William Brennan) would have.

Given the current political dynamics at play, a less persuasive liberal judicial activist is probably the best we can hope for from this President and Senate....

The article and posters make some solid points. However, I think what is needed is an honest re-evaluation of where we stand realistically from an electoral standpoint. While there are still a substantial minority of conservatives out there, there are also a smaller but substantial number of more influential liberals who support the socialist, anti-american agenda. There is also a larger group of SWING VOTERS, maybe 1/3 of the country, that determine elections. It is THEY who voted for Obama and still support him and what little they actually know about his “agenda”. Those are the people that we need to address.

The problem is that we now have a number of structural factors that are working against us that could doom conservatives electorally FOREVER if they are not addressed, and soon; First, DEMOGRAPHICS are against us. The simple fact is that minority voters vote Democratic in substantial numbers, and they are a fast increasing share of the electorate. (The most salient fact is that if the demographics of the U.S. in 2008 were the same as it were in 1992, and whites voted for the GOP in the same proportions, despite everything else McCain WOULD HAVE STILL WON THIS ELECTION HANDILY.) This should cause major concern for anyone who cares about limited government. The demographics are moving even faster against us given immigration and birth patterns. For conservatives to win national elections they need to address this issue as they need to either win an increasingly large share of the white vote (as well as address immigration and consider being more “polarizing”) or an increasingly large share of the minority vote (If anyone thinks they can do that without moving leftward on substantive issues, I’d like to hear their ideas AND see it work in practice)

Second, the liberal media has been successful in their long quest to influence voters; The MSM has never been so biased, but conservatives have to realize that the SWING VOTERS that determine elections are largely apolitical, and they get their news (what little of it) from headlines generated by a liberal newspaper or wire service, t.v. news reporters, etc. The media influences their view of events, and many of these voters believe that if they simply read something in a newspaper or see it on the t.v. news then it must be “true”.

Third, the CULTURE has been quickly moved to the left. The Universities are havens for Marxism and socialism, and there is nothing on the horizon to counter this. Jon Stewart is an unfunny leftist but he DOES have influence. So does Hollywood, MTV, etc. These influences make it “hip” to be liberal, and ostracize conservative views. Younger voters went 2 for 1 for Obama, are now overwhelmingly in favor of liberal positions such as gay marriage. They have been moving steadily leftward with the influence of the education system and pop culture.

Finally, MONEY HAS MADE A DIFFERENCE. George Soros and his billions (Through MOVE-ON.org, ACORN, Media Matters, etc. etc. ) have financed the Left’s agenda through the media AND registering voters. This was a conscious effort, and there is so far no similar committment on the part of any conservative billionaires to do what Soros was willing to do.

I’m not an alarmist, but the reality is that we are facing an existential threat to the America as we have known it. Demographics, media, culture, and money have successfully marginalized conservatives as an electoral force. While George W. Bush was a decent man, he was a “Christian conservative”, he was not an IDEOLOGICAL CONSERVATIVE. As a result, he let these left-wing forces garner strength during his 8 years in office due to his failure to articulate conservative principles, failure to build up conservative institutions, and inability to communicate. He allowed the Left to destroy his reputation and, by extension, the reputation of conservatism in the eyes of swing voters. We are now unfortunately reaping what has been sowed by the inaction. If we don’t get conservative leadership and counter these forces things will soon be irreversable...

Like many here on FR I’m no fan of Sen. McCain (though I am leaning towards holding my nose and voting for him given the alternative); I have to admit I was very skeptical of the McCain campaign strategy of picking a VP nominee so soon after the big Obama speech...BUT I have to admit the way things have played out today I think they have proven to be right in their strategy. All of the leaks today of possible VP names and speculation have indeed done their job of distracting media attention away from the Obama speech AND appear to have done their job in throwing the Obama campaign off its game;

I think the drip, drip, drip of leaks and planted stories have worked quite well, and regardless of who he chooses we’ll soon see that the McCain campaign will successfully blunt some of the Obama momentum coming out of tonight’s speech. Kudos to his Campaign strategists!

Note the liberal media/Pro-McCain bias in the story, even from allegedly “conservative” Fox News:

“Still, any help McCain can get from the conservative base of his party — who believe strongly in smaller government, abolishing abortion, preventing gay marriage, gun rights and going on the attack against Islamic terrorism — is gladly accepted...”

No mention how the “conservative base” is just as concerned (and in many cases, even MORE concerned) with STOPPING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, KEEPING TAXES LOW, and APPOINTING CONSERVATIVE JUDGES. Odd how these issues are excluded from the story, as it is THESE issues that McCain is foursquare against us and these are deal-breakers for many of us.

The issues of the “conservative base” as stated in this article have been conveniently “cherry-picked” to be the issues McCain happens to be strongest on (from a conservative perspective), so I would venture to guess they came straight from McCain campaign talking points directly to the MSM to put him in a more favorable light and show how “conservative” he really is...

Sen. Tom Coburn and Congressman Mike Pence are true conservatives when it comes to reducing the size of government, however it should also be noted that Congressman Pence also happens to be PRO-AMNESTY (Albeit with an unrealistic and unworkable “touchback” provision that he had in his own amnesty plan...)

I agree with you that McCain’s support for amnesty is a DEALBREAKER issue for all the reasons consistently mentioned on FR (i.e. 20 million plus illegals plus 80 to 100 million more family members who will demographically DESTROY conservatism, the GOP, and the country as we know it)

What I find absolutely astounding, and is never addressed by McCain’s defenders, is why he STILL refuses to pledge not to sign any illegal alien amnesty bill (In fact, he still refuses to even acknowledge that his bill amounts to amnesty). His “Secure the borders first” and then not pass legislation addressing the 20 Million plus illegals here until there is a “widespread consensus that the borders are secure” position is WHOLLY INSUFFICIENT. Even the Democrats promise to “secure the borders”. It is empty rhetoric and rings hollow coming from someone with the pro-amnesty history of John McCain. There are no specific benchmarks for “consensus”, and having “Border Governors certify that the borders are secure” is completely disingenuous, given how beholden these Democratic Governors (Napolitano, Richardson, and RINO Perry) are to their large hispanic populations. He obviously thinks we are rubes.

I just find it hard to believe that McCain still doesn’t get it. Of all the issues that he has opposed conservatives on, and there are MANY, this is the one issue on which he could convince a substantial number of disaffected conservatives who are currently sitting on the fence to hold their nose and support him. A simple “I personally disagree with conservatives on the issue, however my side fought and lost the battle. As such, I will spend the next 4 years securing the border and promise I will not sign any legalization bill for illegals during my first term in office” would be minimally sufficient for many (but not all) conservatives.

What does it say to us conservatives when he won’t make that very mild concession (which has very little political downside for him)? Is he that beholden to the pro-amnesty Wall Street Journal cheap labor types and the “La Raza” grievance types? Or, as most of us suspect, does he STILL thinks he’s right in pushing amnesty and will do so as President DESPITE THE STRONG OPPOSITION FROM THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF REPUBLICAN (AND INDEPENDENT) VOTERS? Even if we ignored the litany of times he has metaphorically spit in conservatives’ faces, why in the world would should we support someone who is not be willing to make this very simple pledge on such a crucial issue???

Fair enough; And yes, I do agree that Huckabee’s supporters would not go to Romney, largely due to his religion; However that does not change my point about the Senator being extremely fortunate to have weak opponents and a split field.

I also agree that we need to have more civil discourse and recognize some of the excessive vitriol against the Senator; However, I also think that it should be kept in mind that it has been Senator McCain who has shown tremendous disrespect and condescension towards conservatives over the last 8 years, so it should not come as a surprise that many have such a visceral dislike for him. In many ways, he is simply reaping what he has sowed.

Finally, I certainly appreciate and agree that McCain would be far better on foreign policy, health care, and judicial appointments then a Democrat would. However, all of those must be balanced against the damage he likely will do to conservativism, the GOP, and the country in the long run. As such, I think there will be a significant split in November, and he will not get the “vast majority” of conservatives to support him. Much depends on the next few months, but in my view at this point given his record the presumption should be AGAINST him, not for him.

I’ll agree to disagree on some of your other points, but I think you are far underestimating conservative discontent with the Senator. Given his record, if he wants to have any chance of garnering support from the base it is HIS burden to make amends, and demonstrate he is sincere in his desire to do so. He certainly hasn’t done so yet, and I simply doubt he has it in him since it appears to me that his vindictiveness appears to outweigh his capacity to conciliate.

I think CPAC will be a very telling and seminal point in seeing which way the wind will blow in November. If he were sincere about trying to unite the party, at MINIMUM he would start to make amends by promising that he would focus SOLELY on border enforcement and not sign ANY legalization bill for illegals during his first 4 years in office if elected, since that is the one issue where conservatives are united and he can demonstrate he has truly “heard” us...

I am quite sure I speak for very many conservatives who are not convinced by Mr. “Straight talk”, and this has nothing to do with “talking heads and their followers” as your McCain campaign talking points apparently suggest. This has to do with legitimate objections of informed GOP voters, and your condescension in referring to his substantive opponents as such is quite representative of why your candidate is generating such fervent opposition from so many conservatives.

Yes, there are some solid conservatives who I respect that disagree and will support Sen. McCain despite having reservations, and I didn’t claim to speak for ALL conservatives. Unlike the Senator and his supporters, I actually respect opposing viewpoints even if I don’t agree. That being said, I’m quite certain there are also SUBSTANTIAL numbers of conservatives who feel as I do, FAR more than Buchanan got in 2000, and more than enough to make the difference in November.

Keep in mind, your candidate is where he is through a fluke of circumstances and weak opponents. He has not won a majority of actual REPUBLICAN voters in any primary, and about 2/3 of Republicans have voted AGAINST him. If you think that we are such a tiny minority and won’t make a difference in the General Election, then feel free to continue to follow Sen. McCain’s same strategy of diversion, condescension, and misrepresentation.

It is YOU who are simply spouting “talking points”, and they appear to be taken directly from McCain campaign headquarters. This debate has absolutely nothing to do with Sean or Rush or the “Northeastern media”. These are simply distractions from the substantive objections to your candidate. And as an attorney, like most other conservatives here on Free Republic, I can THINK FOR MYSELF. The talk radio hosts you mention are merely REFLECTING popular conservative discontent with Sen. McCain, not CREATING it.

Furthermore, you are missing the point with your attacks on Romney. Most of us here at FR did NOT support Romney initially nor do we consider him to be a true conservative. I supported Fred Thompson (And no, I’m not convinced that you ever were a TRUE Thompson supporter yourself - you obviously are involved in some capacity with the McCain campaign). I only support Romney as the lesser of two evils between himself and McCain. Romney has not spent the last 8 years working AGAINST conservatives at every turn.

McCain’s 83 percent “conservative” voting record is largely due to his EARLY voting record, when he usually did vote with conservatives, even on major issues. That has NOT been the case since 2000. You conveniently ignore that in the last Congress he was the 45th most “conservative” Senator out of 49 Republicans - hardly something to brag about.

As for McCain’s “changing his position on McCain/Kennedy”, he has NOT substantively changed his position on the bill, (instead, disingenuously talks about “enforcement first” as if this were simply a TIMING problem), and in fact on Meet the Press last week explicitly said that (although of course it “won’t come up”, wink, wink, to the liberal media) he WOULD sign the bill if brought before him. If he truly has changed his position, why not pledge not simply that he will “enforce the borders”, which even the DEMOCRATS promise, but that he will NOT sign any “legalization” bill whatsoever for 4 years and instead focus on securing the border, as he claims he wants to do.

The fact that Sen. McCain has not done so (and if anything, shown every indication otherwise) demonstrates to me that he STILL thinks he is right (as usual), has NOT heard our voices in opposition, and will move full force ahead with his amnesty plan the minute he were in office. I would anticipate he would also move forward with “global warming” anti-competitive regulations, tying the hands of our military, higher taxes, etc as he has advocated while in the Senate for the last eight years. Since 2000, he has done everything possible to betray conservatives and I don’t see any reason to believe this will change one iota if he were elected President. He has certainly done NOTHING to dispel that belief during this campaign.

It is, of course, a “lesser of evils” situation, but if McCain is the GOP nominee I think the presumption for conservatives should be AGAINST supporting him in any way, shape or form for the long term good of conservatism, the GOP, and the country. I think I speak for many conservatives in this view, and your attempts to blame “talk radio” are just as disingenuous as the Senator you obviously represent.

Well, let me try and speak up for the “I’m gonna stay at home crowd”. Or, more likely, the voting third party crowd.

Yes, you are right that John McCain is more conservative than Hillary or Obama. We’ll stipulate to that. HOWEVER, the question is, what is in the best interests of conservatives, the GOP, and the country? A fluke of circumstances, terribly weak candidates, MSM fawning, and a substantial minority of moderate to liberal, misled, and/or uninformed GOP primary voters have conspired to make Sen. McCain the presumptive GOP nominee. It should be noted that he has managed to become the frontrunner of the party while losing 2/3 of GOP voters in almost every primary state.

John McCain not only supported and promoted amnesty for 10 to 20 million or more illegal aliens, he CONTINUES to do so with a wink and a nod to the liberal media and editorial boards. I have no doubt that if he becomes President, in addition to sabotaging conservatives at every turn, he will DESTROY both the GOP AND the country by legalizing these 20 million plus illegals PLUS the 80 to 100 million more immigrants who will then arrive soon thereafter via chain migration and “family reunification”. This doesn’t even address the tens of millions more children of these illegal aliens.

The results of Sen. McCain’s policy would be the demographic destruction of conservatism and in fact the entire culture of the country as we have previously known it. Iraq, abortion, and spending are also irrelevant if you no longer have a country, and his continuing implicit and explicit support for amnesty is a DEALBREAKER for me and should be for any true conservative. It’s not simply a matter of SAYING “The people don’t trust us” and “I will secure the borders first” (a hollow promise in any event given his clear disdain for even doing the rudimentary things necessary to do so such as building a fence) He needs to ACKNOWLEDGE that our opposition is legitimate, ADDRESS our opposition substantively, MAKE SPECIFIC PROMISES that he will not foist his destructive views on us, and stop treating the 80 percent or so of Republicans that oppose him on this crucial issue as a bunch of racists and yahoos.

The fact that he was for the “surge”, is nominally pro-life, and against excessive spending are nice but SECONDARY to me as a mainstream conservative. On the most important issues, from taxes to judges to immigration to the environment, he is a complete and total liberal panderer.

That being said, I would further add that if McCain is the GOP nominee, and there is any chance of having a united GOP against Hildebeat in November, given his track record, the onus would be on HIM to make amends with conservatives, NOT vice-versa. HE has to show that he would sincerely change from being the “Anti-conservative” he has been since 2000, and that he truly UNDERSTANDS and RESPECTS why most conservatives hold him in such low regard. He will have to do something he has shown a complete unwillingness to do - namely LISTEN to opposing views even if he disagrees with them and work WITH conservatives instead of AGAINST us.

The reality is that Rush and Sean Hannity are not causing the dissension - they are merely REFLECTING the dissension and disenchantment that we conservatives have with McCain. And it should also be noted that Both Sean and Rush’s views on substantive issues are far closer to those of most Republicans on most major issues than John McCain’s views are.

So far, McCain has done NOTHING to mend fences. He has instead shown every indication that he will STILL push for an amnesty bill which will destroy the country, will create a coalition with Democrats and RINO’s rather than work with conservatives, and spend the next 4 years continuing to vindictively sabotage every conservative initiative that may come up. Even on Judges we’re almost certain to get Kennedys and O’Connors instead of Scalias and Alitos.

As horrible as it is to contemplate, like many other conservatives, I feel that at this point the prospect of 4 years of a destructive, liberal Democratic President may in fact be the lesser of two evils.

Hope that helps you understand where we are coming from...

If you have read this thread, I think you will see that your pro-McCain views are in a minority here. I am a former Thompson supporter and consider myself a very mainstream conservative. I’ve voted for every GOP nominee for President since Ronald Reagan.

That being said, like many of us in this forum, I am also a conservative first and a Republican second. A fluke of circumstances, terribly weak candidates, MSM fawning, and a substantial minority of moderate to liberal, misled, and/or uninformed GOP primary voters have conspired to make Sen. McCain the presumptive GOP nominee. It should be noted that he has managed to become the frontrunner of the party while losing 2/3 of GOP voters in almost every primary state.

John McCain not only supported and promoted amnesty for 10 to 20 million or more illegal aliens, he CONTINUES to do so with a wink and a nod to the liberal media and editorial boards. I have no doubt that if he becomes President, in addition to sabotaging conservatives at every turn, he will DESTROY both the GOP AND the country by legalizing these 20 million plus illegals PLUS the 80 to 100 million more immigrants who will then arrive soon thereafter via chain migration and “family reunification”. This doesn’t even address the tens of millions more children of these illegal aliens.

The results of Sen. McCain’s policy would be the demographic destruction of conservatism and in fact the entire culture of the country as we have previously known it. Iraq, abortion, and spending are also irrelevant if you no longer have a country, and his continuing implicit and explicit support for amnesty is a DEALBREAKER for me and should be for any true conservative. It’s not simply a matter of SAYING “The people don’t trust us” and “I will secure the borders first” (a hollow promise in any event given his clear disdain for even doing the rudimentary things necessary to do so such as building a fence) He needs to ACKNOWLEDGE that our opposition is legitimate, ADDRESS our opposition substantively, MAKE SPECIFIC PROMISES that he will not foist his destructive views on us, and stop treating the 80 percent or so of Republicans that oppose him on this crucial issue as a bunch of racists and yahoos.

The fact that he was for the “surge”, is nominally pro-life, and against excessive spending are nice but SECONDARY to me as a mainstream conservative. On the most important issues, from taxes to judges to immigration to the environment, he is a complete and total liberal panderer.

That being said, I would further add that if McCain is the GOP nominee, and there is any chance of having a united GOP against Hildebeat in November, given his track record, the onus would be on HIM to make amends with conservatives, NOT vice-versa. HE has to show that he would sincerely change from being the “Anti-conservative” he has been since 2000, and that he truly UNDERSTANDS and RESPECTS why most conservatives hold him in such low regard. He will have to do something he has shown a complete unwillingness to do - namely LISTEN to opposing views even if he disagrees with them and work WITH conservatives instead of AGAINST us.

The reality is that Rush and Sean Hannity are not causing the dissension - they are merely REFLECTING the dissension and disenchantment that we conservatives have with McCain. And it should also be noted that Both Sean and Rush’s views on substantive issues are far closer to those of most Republicans on most major issues than John McCain’s views are.

So far, McCain has done NOTHING to mend fences. He has instead shown every indication that he will STILL push for an amnesty bill which will destroy the country, will create a coalition with Democrats and RINO’s rather than work with conservatives, and spend the next 4 years continuing to vindictively sabotage every conservative initiative that may come up. Even on Judges we’re almost certain to get Kennedys and O’Connors instead of Scalias and Alitos.

As horrible as it is to contemplate, like many other conservatives, I feel that at this point the prospect of 4 years of a destructive, liberal Democratic President may in fact be the lesser of two evils.

I am an AMERICAN first, a conservative second, and a Republican third. A fluke of circumstances, weak candidates, MSM fawning, and a substantial minority of uninformed GOP primary voters have conspired to make Sen. McCain the presumptive GOP frontrunner.

John McCain not only supported and promoted amnesty for illegal aliens, he CONTINUES to do so with a wink and a nod to the liberal media and editorial boards. I have no doubt that if he becomes President, in addition to sabotaging conservatives at every turn, he will DESTROY both the GOP AND the country by legalizing 20 million plus illegals PLUS the 100 million more immigrants to come via chain migration. This will demographically destroy the country as we know it.

The fact that his apologists constantly mention how he was for the surge, is nominally pro-life, and against excessive spending are nice but SECONDARY to me as a conservative. On the most important issues, from taxes to judges to immigration, he is a PANDERER AND A LIBERAL. Iraq, abortion, and spending are also irrelevant if you no longer have a country, and his support for amnesty is a DEALBREAKER. Period.

Depressing and sickening.

I realize that the Hucksters and McCainiacs hate Rush (And apparently Sen. McCain has a dislike for conservatives generally, for that matter)

But what I’m sensing is that this is a concerted effort to manipulate FR by operatives of the McCain PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN ITSELF, not simply like-minded posters, by flooding FR with these types of articles...

Is it just me? I’ve been a Free Republic conservative for many years, and I’m a tin foil hat guy...but I’m becoming VERY suspicious about all of these recent postings on FR.

What these postings have in common is that are not overtly pro-McCain (Because it is obvious that his record on illegal alien amnesty/taxes/global warming/campaign finance/judicial fillibusters are indefensible with conservatives) but are nonetheless designed to have the same effect - getting conservatives to consider the liberal Sen. McCain as an ACCEPTABLE GOP nominee (And the author who is ostensibly defending both “McCain and Huckabee” against Rush here is doing so as a diversion since it is clear that Huckabee has no realistic chance of winning the nomination) It’s not working with me, as I will never support him. Disregarding all of the other reasons, his amnesty support alone is a dealbreaker and will destroy the GOP and the country demographically in a very short time.

Is anyone sensing the same thing about some of these recent postings???