62 Comments

• 1. Adrian  |  February 4th, 2008 at 9:55 am

  If McCain ends up the nominee, will he be able to rally the GOP base?

  I hope McCain is not the nominee, but if he is then the base MUST rally to him. How to make that happen, I don’t know. When Ann Coulter claims she will campaign for Hillary if McCain takes the nomination well…he’s a hard sell.

  We (the “Base”) have to get over the fact that we don’t have a perfect candidate. Get out and fight for your guy sure, I’m still out there for Romney, but when the time comes and whoever “your” candidate happens to be hasn’t made it you have to be there for whoever the nominee is.

  I know some people who plan to stay home or even vote for whichever “D” ends up on the ballot. Are you kidding me? What do you hope to accomplish with that? Send a message? Please! The only message that will send is that Republicans are easy to divide and beat. You can rest assured Democrats will rally behind their nominee, perfect or not.

• 2. Retired Spook  |  February 4th, 2008 at 10:16 am

  If McCain ends up the nominee, will he be able to rally the GOP base?

  Not all of it, that’s for sure. I said the other day I’d give him the benefit of the doubt on his explanation for opposing Bush’s tax cuts — that he was holding out for spending cuts as well. A lot of exhaustive research by the new media hasn’t turned up any evidence of any rhetoric on his part at the time of the votes that would support his claim re: spending cuts. Apparently all McCain said at the time was that it was tax cuts for the Rich. Gee, where have we heard that before?

  I’ve never particularly like McCain, but the more I read about him, the more I dislike him. I said the other day that I could hold my nose and vote for him; now I’m not so sure. My wife says, unless something changes dramatically between now and November, she can’t vote for MCain.

  Now, on the other side of the coin, he may get enough Independent and cross-over moderate Dem votes to make up for the Republicans that he’s going to lose.

• 3. Politics » In Advan&hellip  |  February 4th, 2008 at 10:38 am

  […] unknown wrote an interesting post today on In Advance of Super Tuesday, Dem Race Tightens, McCain Pulls AwayHere’s a quick excerptOf course, these polls could all be wrong, but Real Clear Politics shows an interesting trend: …Some interesting results. On the Democratic side, Obama improved his standing across almost every demographic: men, women, young, old, … […]

• 4. Joe  |  February 4th, 2008 at 10:41 am

  The only problem with this comment:
  This race gets more interesting all the time - and even in contemplating a fractured Democratic party

  Is that Dems are happy with EITHER candidate. Sure they have a preference one or the other, but either would be just fine.
  The Repubs on the other hand have McCain which probably represents the belief of the majority of Repubs, but can’t even come close to the base. Look at the comments on this site alone to see that. Look at the comments of the grand pooba Rush. Think about how many lemmings get all their info from him and will just not want McCain. Now THAT is a “fractured” party.

• 5. hermie  |  February 4th, 2008 at 10:44 am

  McCain will only gain support of the base if he wins the nomination and chooses a conservative as VP.

  He has burned so many bridges regarding conservatives, that I expect him to choose someone like Lindsay Graham, or Christine Whitman, as just as another way to ’stick it’ to us.

  He really believes that he doesn’t need the base, since the alternative would be Hillary. (Sorry Obama fans, Hillary has control of the DNC, and has likely not tapped the cash reserves of the Clinton ‘Charity’ yet.) The MSN have stroked his ego since 2000, gathering soundbites to use, and he thinks that they’ll be ‘fair’ to him, since they are his ‘friends’.

• 6. Romney » In Advance&hellip  |  February 4th, 2008 at 10:57 am

  […] Eagle World News - Daily Newspaper Articles & Archives wrote an interesting post today on In Advance of Super Tuesday, Dem Race Tightens, McCain Pulls AwayHere’s a quick excerpt…the time - and even in contemplating a fractured Democratic party, one must not leave out the possibility that Romney will end up winning 8 or… […]

• 7. Mitt Romney » In Ad&hellip  |  February 4th, 2008 at 11:02 am

  […] Climate Progress wrote an interesting post today on In Advance of Super Tuesday, Dem Race Tightens, McCain Pulls AwayHere’s a quick excerpt…the time - and even in contemplating a fractured Democratic party, one must not leave out the possibility that Romney will end up winning 8 or… […]

• 8. LaMano  |  February 4th, 2008 at 11:07 am

  McCain will not bring us the presidency; only voter’s remorse.

• 9. coulterfan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 11:30 am

  The Dems have two great candidates, but one is EXCEPTIONAL! The only chance McCain has is against Hillary- and even then he would probably lose the GE. . . but there would be enough galvanization of the base for the GOP to pick up seats in Congress.

  I am a big supporter of Obama, but will vote for either. . . BTW, have you guys seen this supporter-created music video? No matter if you are a Republican voting for McCain or Romney or Democrat, Independent, whatever. . .Isn’t this a positive message for ALL Americans?

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fZHou18Cdk

• 10. Ricorun  |  February 4th, 2008 at 12:16 pm

  It turns out the Dead are Obamaheads. Who’da guessed? Now, if Jerry Garcia shows up, I’d be mighty impressed.

• 11. Doug  |  February 4th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

  In 1980 when Reagan pummeled Jimmy Carter, 23% of those who considered themselves conservatives voted for Carter, 11% of Republicans. That is approxiamately the number of people today that are unhappy with McCain on our side.

  Does McCain really need to rally them? Reagan didn’t.

• 12. coulterfan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 12:25 pm

  >>It turns out the Dead are Obamaheads. Who’da guessed?

  Boy that puts “Deadhead” Ann Coulter in a tough spot!

  Is she going to change her preference from Hillary Clinton to Obama?

• 13. Ricorun  |  February 4th, 2008 at 12:40 pm

  coulterfan: Boy that puts “Deadhead” Ann Coulter in a tough spot!

  There’s a tidbit of info I wasn’t aware of. I had to check it out. And it’s true! She’s a huge Deadhead! I guess that completes the circle: you’re a fan of Coulter, Coulter’s a fan of the Dead, the Dead are fans of Obama, and so are you.

• 14. coulterfan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

  >>and so are you

  And millions of others- Democrats, Republicans, Independents, apolitical. . .

  Eisenhauer’s lifelong Republican granddaughter just endorsed him, I know MANY Republicans who say they would consider voting for him, heck- even GOP pollster Frank Luntz is enamored of him and said recently “I don’t know how to beat him!”

  While many Dems would vote for McCain over Hillary, there would be many other Republicans who would vote Obama over McCain!

• 15. coulterfan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 12:54 pm

  and Tucker Carlson’s also a big deadhead. . .

• 16. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot  |  February 4th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

  I guess it’s all over; every conservative I know looks to aging rock bands for advice on how to vote.

  I’m a huge Zevon fan; Zevon’s good friend was Chuck Norris; Chuck’s hairdresser supports Roger Calero whose platform looks just like O’Bambi’s. I guess I should support the Socialist Obama, too.

• 17. Choose.Life.Not.War  |  February 4th, 2008 at 1:02 pm

  Thanx to George W. Bush, the DemocratIC candidate will get ALL of Obama and Hillary’s collective support in November.

  And thanx to George W. Bush, the Republan candidate will receive any scraps that are left over…. if any.

• 18. Ricorun  |  February 4th, 2008 at 1:04 pm

  Me too. They’re the only band I’ve seen more than 10 times. Well, the only band other than local bands.

  I guess that means I should vote for Obama. But I can’t — Dasein already told me I had to vote for Hillary.

• 19. Choose.Life.Not.War  |  February 4th, 2008 at 1:08 pm

  Conservatives need to stop blaming the media for the results we are seeing in the GOP primary.

  You’re either implying that conservatives are too stupid to make up their own minds and aimlessly follow what the media tells them, or the conservative “movement” is fading faster than Rush Limbaugh’s relevancy.

• 20. coulterfan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 1:41 pm

  And what’s with the Aging Wrestlers/Action Stars endorsing candidates?

  We have “Chuckabee” (I thought he was against gay marriage, but why is Chuck standing behind him while his wife is nowhere to be seen? ; )

  Hulk Hogan has endorsed Obama. . .

  Wilfred Brimley(?) has endorsed McCain. . .and so has Schwarzenegger (who is NOT a ‘conservative’, but IS an aging action star!)

  Maybe we should have a WWF-style pay-per-view event? My money’s on Schwarzenegger, but Brimley COULD slow him down- or put him to sleep!

• 21. Almiranta  |  February 4th, 2008 at 1:43 pm

  Joe, do you even realize how goofy you sound when you say McCain”…represents the belief of the majority of Repubs, but can’t even come close to the base…”

  The “majority of Republicans..” ARE the base.

  I think the movement toward McCain is a media construct, a success on the part of the Agenda Media to convince people who don’t really like or trust McCain to vote for him anyway because of the constant drumbeat from the media that McCain is the ONLY one who can “beat Hillary”.

  And we believe this because…….????? Because we know that the Agenda Media really want to make sure we nominate the best candidate? Because they want the Republican candidate to win, and are helping us out?

  And against Obama, McCain will be at a serious disadvantage. He is old, sour, grouchy, with a well-earned reputation for having a terrible and vicious temper, while Barack is young, dynamic, charming, and radiates good nature. McCain is part and parcel of old-time D.C. and Barack is running as the New Guy. McCain has a history of betraying his party and its base, while Obama is so new and wet behind the ears he hasn’t had a chance to betray anyone.

  Once Romney stops debating other Repubicans and starts in on Dems, on the new Socialist platform of the party, on the nuts and bolts of economic strength and growth and the different aspects of national security, he can blow any Dem running out of the water. The country needs a strong CEO, and of all the candidates Romney is the only one who qualifies–AND he respects the miltary (as opposed to “loathing it” a la Clinton) AND he respects the country and its symbols, such as the flag and the pledge of allegiance (as opposed to Obama, who openly disdains both and refuses to show respect for either) AND he is young and dynamic and upbeat and optimistic and pragmatic and competent.

  But in the meantime I will look at WHO is telling me WHAT, and at what motive that source may have for trying so hard to convince me of what I know to be false.

  And puhleeze spare me any more accolades for McCain’s “heroism”. He did a great thing when he refused to be freed till his men were freed. Respect and praise are due FOR THAT. But trying to parlay that into an identity that ecnompasses great leadership and dedication to conservative concepts is way too much of a stretch.

• 22. bagni  |  February 4th, 2008 at 2:00 pm

  markrom…..
  you seen this?
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY&3

  i think repubs are going to have an interesting challenge
  because even if they wanted to they couldn’t create or drive something like this with authenticity
  above and beyond the video’s message
  is the fact it’s got 700k views in two days
  i’m suspect you and your crew will respond negatively to this piece of media/public voice by obama
  but whether for or against it
  it’s powerful
  let’s hear it for the marketing geeks!

• 23. coulterfan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 2:14 pm

  >>let’s hear it for the marketing geeks!

  Actually it was created by a supporter (Will.i.am from Black-Eyed Peas, with John Legend, studio musicians, etc), independent of the ‘marketing geeks’! When I first saw Obama’s speech I heard melody, rhythm, chorus, and deep emotion. Impressive how it was turned into song, without ‘time-shift’ gimmicks and the like. . .

  Obama is the real deal and is inspiring a movement. And for anyone saying he is without substance, please visit his web site and look at his DETAILED positions on the issues (and compare his level of detail to McCain or Romney on health care, for instance).

  Grace, dignity, honesty, integrity, passion, eloquence, and deep understanding of the issues- he’s got the entire package.

• 24. Joe  |  February 4th, 2008 at 2:30 pm

  Joe, do you even realize how goofy you sound when you say McCain”…represents the belief of the majority of Repubs, but can’t even come close to the base…”
  The “majority of Republicans..” ARE the base.
  OK… so the “majority of Republicans ARE the base”, yet the base doesn’t like McCain, yet McCain is certainly gaining a lot of votes and endorsements.
  No… the majority of Republicans are a bit more toward the center which is why McCain has so much support. The “BASE” is the kook right like what you read on this blog. Those that are saying what a crazy liberal John McCain is. I used to consider myself one of those “majority of Republicans”. I no longer consider myself any kind of Republican what-so-ever.
  I think the movement toward McCain is a media construct, a success on the part of the Agenda Media
  Good grief… will you stop blaming the media for EVERYTHING??? You have to be kidding me. No… the reason McCain has such momentum is because of his opponents. Romney panders to anyone he talks to and people see thru that and Huckabee is a religious zealot that wants to change the Constitution to better reflect God’s laws. Either way, people see thru it. People don’t want a right-wing wacko, we’ve already gone thru 8 yrs of one. People want someone more moderate. The bitter partisanship is from the extreme edges that are so well represented on this blog.
  Once Romney stops debating other Repubicans and starts in on Dems
  Well that won’t happen since Romney’s chances are slim and null and slim left town. He will win Utah big. But he can’t win the overall nomination with Huck stealing all the conservative wacko votes. Huck is hanging on just to become McCain’s Veep.

• 25. NeoClown  |  February 4th, 2008 at 2:54 pm

  As a life long democrat I will be happy with either Hillary, Obama, or McCain in the White House.

  I’m happy to see Romney going down in flames. He’s just a Bush-like, mindless, spoiled, frat-boi.

• 26. Brian G.  |  February 4th, 2008 at 2:58 pm

  I’d disagree with you, Joe. I’d say the majority of Republicans are not the media labeled “base,” which in their definition is the absolute social conservatives and evangelicals. I personally don’t see those people as the real base of the GOP.

• 27. Doug  |  February 4th, 2008 at 3:39 pm

  The Republican base actually would probably better equate to what was a Scoop Jackson Democrat.

  I really have no doubt that Scoop Jackson would clean up in our nomination and likely would have beet Bush Jr. as well.

  The religious right part of the Republicans may not turn out to vote for someone like a Rudy based on abortion issues. That portion that is emphatic towards the illegal immigration situation may stay home with McCain. However, the base would be that group that would vote Republican with either.

• 28. Joe  |  February 4th, 2008 at 3:52 pm

  Brian G,
  I think we are saying basically the same thing.
  I don’t think the majority of Repubs make up ath ultra-conservative “media” base. I think that is the fringe.
  I think the majority of Repubs want someone more moderate.

  My point is it is the ultra-conservative fringe that are blasting McCain and saying they’d rather not vote than vote for McCain. It is the majority of Repubs that are more moderate and would vote for McCain.

• 29. FmrMarine  |  February 4th, 2008 at 5:05 pm

  Almir

  You are soooo correct on your post,except for one small detail.
  McLame had NO choice but to stay in jail when offered to be released. The military prisoner protocol is -first in, first out.
  He was under ORDERS to stay.
  As for his TWO HOURS in “combat” that hardly qualifies one to be relegated to the “HERO” status, and being a POW as bad as it is does not make one a “hero” either.

  Spook; im with you
  if mcnasty gets the GOP nod ill sit home rather than vote for that RINO who spit in every republicans eye for the last 8 years.

• 30. FmrMarine  |  February 4th, 2008 at 5:10 pm

  This is an interesting read about mcnuts,
  read and draw your own conclusions.
  http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd59.htm

• 31. Brian  |  February 4th, 2008 at 5:11 pm

  The only RINOs I see here are the ones threatening to stay home rather than vote for McCain in the general election.

• 32. Joe  |  February 4th, 2008 at 5:38 pm

  FmrMarine:
  As for his TWO HOURS in “combat” that hardly qualifies one to be relegated to the “HERO” status, and being a POW as bad as it is does not make one a “hero” either.
  
  THIS is exactly what is wrong with politics today. This guy is at a minimum a war veteran, at best a war hero. I don’t know the details of his captivity, so I don’t know one way or the other.
  So he was in Vietnam and people in your party like to point it out when he was and is all FOR the “surge” in Iraq and staying there for 100 yrs.
  Now he is going to be your nominee and it isn’t the nominee you want, so you try to minimize his military service. Saying it was barely any combat and his captivity wasn’t anything much. Just to try and shoot this guy down.

  That is disgusting.

• 33. Retired Spook  |  February 4th, 2008 at 5:49 pm

  Spook; im with you. If mcnasty gets the GOP nod ill sit home rather than vote for that RINO

  Fmr. Marine, I haven’t missed an election since 1966, so I doubt that I’ll sit home. I may leave the block for “President” blank, but there are too many other offices, local, state and federal that I want to have a say in. Hell, I may not decide for sure until I walk into that booth and pull the curtain behind me.

• 34. Mark Noonan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 6:07 pm

  Spook,

  I, on the other hand, will campaign enthusiastically for either Romney or McCain, because both of them are good men who would be vastly better than either Obama or Clniton would be.

• 35. Casper  |  February 4th, 2008 at 6:08 pm

  Spook,
  I haven’t missed an election since 1968, even though I’ve had to hold my nose more than once when voting. I’m guessing than when push comes to shove, you will make a choice, if for no other reason than it will give you the right to complain for the next four years.

• 36. Casper  |  February 4th, 2008 at 7:02 pm

  Interesting Mark. there is a decent chance you and I could be voting for the same person come November. That is if Clinton gets the Democratic nomination.

• 37. Timothy Horrigan  |  February 4th, 2008 at 7:19 pm

  Well, Romney is a warm, likeable, consistent and resolute leader in the Bush tradition. Even when he is saying something which might seem harsh, he always smiles, always keeps his eyebrows up and never blinks That’s warmth. That’s likeability. McCain on the other hand is moody and sometimes cold.

  McCain is a maverick who often flipflops and is often disloyal to his party. Romney adopted a consistent set of positions on the issues when he was a young man, and those conservative positions have never changed over the decades… not even by an inch. That’s consistency. That’s resoluteness. And you can’t doubt his sincerity: he just oozes sincerity from every pore of his being.

• 38. ny conserative, a dying breed  |  February 4th, 2008 at 7:22 pm

  McCain = I do not vote in the presidential election in 2008.

  Can’t hold my nose that much. If the US economy is to be destroyed by environmental laws which will make companies leave even faster than today let it happen under a democrat and not a RINO.
  8 years of a mostly RINO is enough, can’t take any more which is destroying the conservative movement of low taxes and less government. They have forgotten the less government part.

  Reagan was successful in 1980 due to the failings of Carter.

  Sometimes the only way to fix something is after it is totally broken. Let it get really bad and maybe conservative principles can be put back in charge in 2012.

• 39. Doug  |  February 4th, 2008 at 7:25 pm

  Bwaahaaah, bwaahaaahaa,

  Sorry Mr. Horrigan, I haven’t had a really good laugh in awhile.

• 40. phnx  |  February 4th, 2008 at 7:48 pm

  The only reason I might vote for McCain is his pledge to nominate strict constructionists to the Court.

  Otherwise I am ambivalent.

• 41. FmrMarine  |  February 4th, 2008 at 8:16 pm

  Spook

  “staying home” ment just what you articulated.
  Definitely Voting, and maybe leaving the president area un-filled. If he gets the nod, a LOT will hinge on his Vice Pres pick.

• 42. Rich  |  February 4th, 2008 at 8:17 pm

  Wow you McCain haters are really starting to sound like a bunch of whiners. If you believe Romney has the support of the base, then why the heck is he not doing better in the race? One would assume that having “the base” in ones corner would equal winning elections and gaining delegates. If Romney can’t beat McCain who has no money and no support from the establishment, please explain how the hell he can beat Clinton or Obama and all the money and establishment power they have at their disposal. People claiming to be for the conservative movement in one sentence and then vowing to let Clinton win the presidency the next should not be taken seriously. Either you are a lib posting here causing havoc or you really don’t grasp how bad a Clinton presidency will be. Either way, the whining is getting very annoying.

• 43. Ricorun  |  February 4th, 2008 at 8:33 pm

  ny conservative: If the US economy is to be destroyed by environmental laws which will make companies leave even faster than today let it happen under a democrat and not a RINO.

  Here’s an idea. The linked article is about new manufacturing jobs in wind energy. The entire West Coast (WA, OR, and CA) are starting to install smart grid technology. Someone has to install all those meters. You can’t off-shore that. A second concentrated solar power manufacturing plant is under construction in New Mexico. Thin film photovoltaic manufacturing plants are coming on-line ind CA and AZ. Another geothermal plant just opened in Idaho, and several more are being built along the Cascade Range in WA and OR and the Imperial Valley in CA. Someone has to build them, and string the power lines, and maintain the plants. Commercial scale cellulosic biofuel plants are being built in GA, NY, (the other places I forget). All of those things expect to supply product at prices below gas plants and near or below coal plants (in the case of stationary energy) or gasoline and diesel (in the case of transportation energy). Those darned greenies.

  Over the weekend I listened to a roundtable with three energy analysts discussing the future of oil supply and demand. The message I took away from it was… uh oh. Different individuals on the panel offered different details, and offered different ideas. But the bottom line was that if we don’t dramatically improve efficiency and find alternatives PDQ, our economy is going to be in for a world of hurt.

• 44. Ricorun  |  February 4th, 2008 at 8:37 pm

  And if off-shoring is your concern (and it should be), you should give this a read.

• 45. Casper  |  February 4th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

  “Reagan was successful in 1980 due to the failings of Carter.”

  Maybe Obama will be successful in 2008 because of the failings of Bush. LOL

  Ricorun,
  I have a good friend who really keeps up on the energy situation. He is convinced we are about to hit a major wall in the near future. I just hope that we have something up and ready if he is right.

• 46. Ricorun  |  February 4th, 2008 at 9:32 pm

  Casper, here’s a link to the roundtable discussion if you’re interested. Be prepared to sit for a while, because it’s an hour long. In fact, sitting is a good position to be in, because it’s not a happy scenario they paint.

  It’s amazing to me that the problem has gotten so little play by any of the candidates during the campaign. But it’s coming. And if we don’t get serious about it soon, it’s going to really hurt. Doing nothing is a very, very bad option.

• 47. Casper  |  February 4th, 2008 at 9:45 pm

  Ricorun,
  Thanks for the link.

  I’m really not that surprised it hasn’t had much play from the candidates as who wants to come off as negative.

• 48. Ricorun  |  February 4th, 2008 at 10:43 pm

  Casper: I’m really not that surprised it hasn’t had much play from the candidates as who wants to come off as negative.

  But it doesn’t have to BE negative. However, it WILL be if we do nothing. It’s not JUST about global warming. It’s about energy supply and demand. It’s about national security. If we do something we can create jobs. We can reduce the trade imbalance. We can stabilize the dollar. Perhaps best of all, we can make OPEC irrelevant. In time. But we can’t do that until alternatives get to the point where they can benefit from economy of scale. That can happen pretty quickly in some cases, because if the manufacturing base is there, and workers are available, plants can be built rather quickly. The problem is the manufacturing base. For one thing, some alternatives need a little more R&D. We can let the Europeans and others do it, or we can do it ourselves. Other alternatives are ready to go. No major technical hurdles are needed. What’s needed is capital to build the freakin’ plants. In 2007 green energy has attracted a billion dollars in private investment. That’s a lot of investment capital. But it’s chicken feed if you really want to get things going. Even so though, it’s getting so private investment alone is creating a manufacturing, construction, and assembly base faster than skilled employees are becoming available. You want a stimulus package? Retrain people.

  The more I read the more I become convinced that what we have here is a perfect storm. We have a set of serious problems, but they all lead to essentially the same set of solutions. And if we address the problems correctly, the solutions could be very positive in many different, and very important ways. This doesn’t have to hurt if we do it right. But it almost certainly will to the extent that we do nothing.

• 49. George  |  February 4th, 2008 at 10:50 pm

  Is this the new conservatism? Acidic, vitriolic hate for anyone who does not adhere to strict conservative orthodoxy? Count me out.

  Here’s hoping Rush and his ditto-heads throw themselves off a bridge when McCain wins the nomination.

• 50. Casper  |  February 4th, 2008 at 11:15 pm

  Ricorun,
  I agree. We are at a tipping point. If we make the right choices, we can lead the world in energy development for the next century, or we can watch others take the lead. Our choice.

• 51. Almiranta  |  February 4th, 2008 at 11:23 pm

  Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe…where to start?

  Let’s start with defining “kook right”. It appears to be anyone who does not agree with you. But let’s play along: How far “right” does one have to go to qualify as a “kook”?

  Thinking the Constitution is and should remain the defining document of our country?

  Believing in the 10th Amendment?

  Believing in the 2nd Amendment?

  Believing that lower taxes create a stronger economy?

  Believing this should be a country of individuals and not groups?

  Objecting to Socialist agendas?

  Just where did we veer off into “kookdom” as defined by a radical Lefty? As I go through the conservative posters I see here, I see individuals who strongly believe in the tenets I just set forth. Maybe you should take a look at your hair-trigger tendency to dump anyone who does not agree with you into the “kook” bin.

  Most, if not all, of McCain’s support and endorsements come from the barely to the right of center crowd. No argument there. What remains to be seen is how many who are even just a tad bit to the right of that will tolerate him.

  BTW, the complaint about McCain regarding his political stance is that the word has to be plural—”stances”. He says he is conservative yet sponsors a bill which goes against the Constitutional right to free speech—a right, by the way, which originally MEANT political free speech, not pornography or vulgarity. He says he is a conservative yet he co-sponsors a bill to essentially create open borders and give citizenship to people who have defied our laws. Some look at what he says, some at what he does.

  Yes, there are people in the middle who are not concerned about things like that. But they are not the “base”—as much as you radicals would like to think so.

  The very fact that people like you defend him is more than enough to prove his lack of true conservative credentials.

  As for your whining about “blaming the media”—-How do you “know” McCain is the favorite of the GOP? You heard about it or read about it in the media. How do you “know” McCain is the only one who has a shot at beating Hillary? Ditto. Pretty much everything you “know” about McCain has come from the media—which are proven to be overwhelmingly liberal, if not downright Liberal.

  I didn’t invent that fact. I didn’t create that fact. I merely observe that fact.

  If you want to argue that the media in general prefer to have a Republican president, please make that argument. A little historical background to support such argument would be helpful. Otherwise, my assertion that the media in general would prefer to have a Dem in the White House stands, as a very obvious fact.

  Your inability to frame a thought without degenerating into name-calling pretty much defines the breadth and scope of your political objectivity. “Kook”, “wacko”, “zealot”—you do like to cram people you don’t like into convenient little categories, don’t you? Again, it appears the only criterion for being categorized by you is not agreeing with you.

  Yes, Joey, we get it. You can’t stand conservatives, you choose to define all conservative positions in the most denigrating and insulting terms possible, you have no respect for people with deep religious convictions, etc etc etc.

  But you are completely correct in one thing: You definitely are not “..any kind of Republican what-so-ever” and from your hateful rhetoric I doubt you ever were. But if you were, at least on the surface, you clearly have found your true ideological home now, with the emotion-dependent and hate-reliant radical Left. (And I can and do differentiate between moderate Dems and the radical Left, and don’t just lump anyone who is not a conservative as a radical “kook” Lefty.)

• 52. Almiranta  |  February 4th, 2008 at 11:34 pm

  Take a pill, George. You are not seeing “..Acidic, vitriolic hate for anyone who does not adhere to strict conservative orthodoxy…” Get real.

  You are seeing that kind of reaction TO conservative orthodoxy, as you like to put it, from your side. Surely you have not missed the BDS hatefest that has been going on for the past eight years.

  But the comments about McCain are centered on his record and on his qualifications. I have probably said the nastiest things you have read about him on this blog when I said he was old and sour and, I believe, grumpy. Ooooohhhh.
  Gee, that must be nearly as bad as calling him a criminal and a traitor and calling his wife a murderer. Oh, yeah, when it comes from YOUR side it is fine, and the terms and conditions change.

  Noting that McCain’s war record was worth respect but not enough to qualify him for the leadership of the Free World is not “acidic” or “vitriolic” or anywhere close to “hate”.

  You radical Lefties have such amazing sensitivity to some things, and such a proclivity for redefining terms as it suits you. When people noted that Bill Clinton had some issues which may have been illegal, the hysteria from the left was palpable, and you all went ballistic with your accusations of “hate” and “malice” and so on. By your definitions, a police officer could not arrest anyone without being driven by “hate” and “vengeance” and whatever else was the perjorative of the day. But you felt completely justified in heaping the most vile of accusations on Bill’s successor, and you still do—truly vicious personal attacks on him and his family, for example.

  Now you are blithely overlooking or ignoring the truly vicious attacks on conservatives we see here every single day, on nearly every single thread, but at the same time getting the vapors over legitimate political discourse regarding the objective qualifications of one man over another.

• 53. Barak  |  February 4th, 2008 at 11:47 pm

  25. NeoClown | February 4th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
  As a life long democrat I will be happy with either Hillary, Obama, or McCain in the White House.

  I’m happy to see Romney going down in flames. He’s just a Bush-like, mindless, spoiled, frat-boi.

  Well, that just says………well everything! I said this was a liberals dream back in 2000′ and so the country goes!

• 54. Barak  |  February 5th, 2008 at 12:00 am

  ABOUT OBAMA:

  Voted against banning partial birth abortion. (Oct 2007)
  Stem cells hold promise to cure 70 major diseases. (Aug 2007)
  Trust women to make own decisions on partial-birth abortion. (Apr 2007)
  Extend presumption of good faith to abortion protesters. (Oct 2006)
  Constitution is a living document; no strict constructionism. (Oct 2006)
  Pass the Stem Cell Research Bill. (Jun 2004)
  Protect a woman’s right to choose. (May 2004)
  Supports Roe v. Wade. (Jul 1998)
  Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
  Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
  Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
  Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)

  FOR MORE…………
  http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

  That’s all this conservative needs to know……..oops, that’s why I don’t like Hillary…….oops, that’s why I don’t like Mcain.

  Does ONE issue really affect me that much? Have you ever held a baby in your arms and said,”goochy goochy goo, aren’t you lucky your Mom was a conservative!” Pathetic People, absolutely pathetic!

• 55. Almiranta  |  February 5th, 2008 at 12:49 am

  “He’s just a Bush-like, mindless, spoiled, frat-boi.”

  Yep, folks, this is what passes for intellectual political analysis on the radical Left.

  Yet it is the radical Lefties who accuse US of being “elitist”. Somehow emotion-based knee-jerk superficial judgmentalism is fine, as long as it is a Lefty being so judgmental.

  Now it seems that the big deal is that Mitt reminds some people of Bush. Maybe it’s because he has been faithfully married to the same woman for more than 20 years, and still openly loves and respects her. Maybe it is because he is proud to be an American. Maybe it is because he went to a good school. Maybe it is because he served as a governor who was noted for reaching across the aisle to work with Democrats. Maybe it is because he is a man of faith who is not ashamed to be so. Maybe it is because he believes this country needs to have a strong national defense. Maybe it is because he is a fiscal conservative who understands the needs of a strong economy. Maybe it is because he believes in equality of opportunity and rejects the Socialist model of equality of outcome, as well as the Socialist desire to confiscate personal property for redistribution by the State. Maybe it is because he believes that the Constitution is and should remain the defining authority of this country, as it is written. Maybe it is because he believes in the sanctity of life.

  Or is it because the radical Left has taken a dislike to a man whose views are so incompatible with their own, and who feel not only justified in vilifying him but obligated to do so, and who feel that nothing can be more of an insult than to be compared to Bush?

  (By the way, the Left’s last two beloved candidates for the presidency were much closer to Barak’s mischaracterization of Romney. Both were “frat bois” and both were from very privileged backgrounds, both lived very elite lifestyles growing up (one in a luxury hotel in D.C. where his daddy was a Senator and one in the rarified air of Cape Cod, sailing with the real JFK and moving on to a series of wives who brought him mansions and limousines and private jets) and at least one of them had an education very similar to that of Bush, though without the MBA from Harvard. I always got a kick out of the mouthbreathing radical Left excoriating a former union electrician from Casper, Wyoming, and a guy who spent his childhood wearing jeans and T-shirts and riding his bike in the streets of middle-brow Midland, Texas, for the ridiculous assertion that they were “elites”.

  Now it looks like we are in for it again, if we nominate a successful business man who has worked very very hard and been very very good at what he does, so some yahoo can call him “spoiled”.

  Query” Is “boi” some new snotty code word from the radical Left, or is it just a typo? I think I’ve seen it before…..

• 56. Dasein Libsbane  |  February 5th, 2008 at 2:14 am

  “Barak’s mischaracterization”
  For the record it was neoclown, not Barak.

• 57. phnx  |  February 5th, 2008 at 5:52 am

  Almiranta,

  Your recollection of the hysteria on the left whenever one of their chosen is attacked on issues is spot on. Hugh Hewitt raised a concern yesterday that election of Obama might actually split the country along racial lines even further than it is already. He predicts that any attack on Obama on the issues will be interpretted by the left wing and Blacks as a racial attack. That’s not a pretty picture of the future.

• 58. Joe  |  February 5th, 2008 at 10:58 am

  Almiranta, Almiranta, Almiranta,
  You are so freaking condescending it stinks.

  Amazing how easily posters here are ok throwing the “kook” label out to Democrats, but get all offended when it is tossed at them.
  The “kookdom” I am referring to that you were so shocked at are those from the far right. Those that are saying McCain’s war experience is nothing more than “a couple hours of battle” just because he doesn’t agree with 100% of your world view. Those that are so far out of the mainstream that anyone who disagrees with the war in Iraq is “un-American”. Those that want to change the Constitution to better reflect “God’s laws”. Those that blindly say that if a Dem is in control, they will take away your guns, your taxes will quadruple and there will be gays running around the streets having crazy orgies in front of everyone. I could go on and on with examples from posters on this blog. That would most DEFINITELY qualify as “kook right” in a lot of people’s minds.

  As for McCain’s “stances”, have you heard Romney’s stances? How do you support him then? It wasn’t very long ago where he said that he would be more for gay rights and pro-abortion than Ted Kennedy. Then as he was inching closer to running for President all of the sudden he is dead against it. If you want to support a panderer, then by all means go ahead… but most of America sees right thru that. And I am not supporting McCain, but he is the best of lot. Mitt is nothing more than a used car salesman and Huck is… well… a bit wacko.

  How do I “know” McCain is the favorite of the GOP? Well… I don’t know. Maybe because he is getting the most votes in Republican primaries? I know that is an awful way to come up with that conclusion, but hey… I’m crazy like that.
  “Everything you know about McCain has come from the Media” – that is a pretty dumb comment. Obviously you feel everyone must go and personally interview every candidate. But hey, I read more than just the newspaper. But I don’t know what you want. What do you know about some of the candidates and where did you get your info?

  And this comment:
  If you want to argue that the media in general prefer to have a Republican president, please make that argument. A little historical background to support such argument would be helpful. Otherwise, my assertion that the media in general would prefer to have a Dem in the White House stands, as a very obvious fact.
  What the hell are you talking about? So I would have to prove something, but you just have to say it is “obvious” and you don’t have to prove anything? Again, you prove to be a condescending jerk. For every “Media Bias” post that Mark has put out, you could find one going the complete opposite way.

  Your inability to frame a thought without degenerating into name-calling pretty much defines the breadth and scope of your political objectivity. “Kook”, “wacko”, “zealot”—you do like to cram people
  Wow….. have you read some of the posts of others here? Obviously in your world only Dems call people names. What color is the sky in your world?

  Noting that McCain’s war record was worth respect but not enough to qualify him for the leadership of the Free World is not “acidic” or “vitriolic” or anywhere close to “hate”.
  How about just respecting that he SERVED?? I see how you people really love the troops. Just like when neocon called Max Cleeland an “idiot for blowing himself up”.

  You people are so caught up on this whole “experience” thing. Obama doesn’t have enough. Hillary doesn’t have enough. Obviously McCain doesn’t have enough. You people believe only if you have any executive experience makes it enough to qualify as President.

• 59. Barak  |  February 5th, 2008 at 11:44 am

  56. Dasein Libsbane | February 5th, 2008 at 2:14 am
  “Barak’s mischaracterization”
  For the record it was neoclown, not Barak.

  Thanks Dasein!

  Anybody want to give the clueless censervative (ME) tips on how to put mine or the others words in bold so they might be more distinguished.

  I can’t believe Almy thought I was bashing Romney!

• 60. Dasein Libsbane  |  February 5th, 2008 at 5:08 pm

  HTML; to make something BOLD use the “less than” “<” followed by a “b” followed by a greater than, look below the “POST” button for code. After bold, use the same code but add a slash “/” before the “b” to indicate “turn off” bold.

  A handy way is to right click on the web page and select “View source” this shows all the code used on the page you’re viewing. Find the HTML you want to copy, copy and paste the code and hit “Preview” to see if you got the right code.

  Good luck.

• 61. Doug  |  February 5th, 2008 at 6:03 pm

  Dasein,

  Thanks! Now I’ll know how to put links into blogs, always wanted to know that.

• 62. Barak  |  February 5th, 2008 at 7:04 pm

  Thanks Dasein

Matt Margolis on Twitter