Redstate

I do know that sometimes we all travel a path through a fire or storm in our lives. We end up the stronger for it

In a metaphor I am sure you will understand, it's more like a direct hit with an MK77. I just don't know what will be recognizable once the flames recede.

"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report

I do not know what will be recognizable either. We may end up starting all over again with rebuilding the conservative movement. That MK77 does a lot of damage and very little remains recognizable too with a direct hit. (But hey... it has less Benzene than Napalm, so that must make it environmentally friendly!)

The rebuilding process, and more importantly who does the rebuilding, will determine what comes out at the end. That is why I will not sit on the sidelines. I intend to be involved in the rebuilding to make it what Buckley, Kirk and Burke envisioned. I do not want to see an empty shell of its origins that doesn't resemble the original on the inside.

There is a lot of work to be done. Now is as good a time as any to start. We need to work for the people who are in office now to solidify there position for future leadership roles. There is going to be a lot of purging going on. I just want to ensure the people we need do not get purged.

Then we need to find the right people to bring up as new members of the class of 94 (figuratively speaking) to assume the mantle of the new branding of conservatism.

We will get there, it just takes the will and patience to do it right.

Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(""The only reason that some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.")

The GOP is dying and will continue to lose due to the lack of character and principles of the current leaders and politicians - this will be a disaster for the citizenry.

of view and legislate. Can you access spell check in the comments box?

Other than Janice Rogers Brown, Bill Pryor, Roberts & Alito, it's been a very disappointing seven years overall.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

I worked for 30 years in my home state of Mississippi to establish the republican party. And we got Trent Lott. I've worked for 20 years to establish the republican party in Georgia. And we have Saxby Chambliss.

Fellas, I finished with this republican party. They are liars just like the democrats. There is no difference in them.

I will vote for Bob Barr in November. I know the Perot effect. But since it doesn't matter if the democrats win because McCain is a democart as sure as Hilary Clinton is, at least I'll have some satisfaction knowing I voted for someone I THOUGHT might be different. I know for sure McCain is not!!!

We are not witnessing just the death of our party; we are witnessing the death of our country. And may God help us all.

Keep working for people who represent conservative values. When candidates, or the party for that matter, abandons you or fails to provide equal treatment of your views withhold that support.

Make yourself known to all who will listen and keep the faith. Inspire others, persevere and don't give up. This country will not die if that becomes your modus operandi.

"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report

when conservatives dominated, and esp when we emphasized national security, tax cuts and social issues. We've lost when we have run moderates.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

And stop being jerks!

Join The Revolution!
BigGator5.net

but as I was passing you, I put on my Reagan glasses, looked down your throat and swore there must be a pony down there.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gamecock_0

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

that declared victory when McCain backed off his crticism of NC GOP ad after RS and Rush, et al raised hell. I suggested that said victory justified turning McCain bumper stickers right side up.

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gamecock/2008/apr/29/in_hinzsight_mccain_c...

I still favor turning gators over on their backs and let them be eaten by 5 Big scorpions.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

game

March 21 2005, passage of S.686. Some would point to that moment in time and those actions by a Republican majority as where the many Americans began to think the Republican party had gone too far.

As someone who came to the Republican party because of the over bearing Federal Government into matters best left to the state, this was a very troubling, trash the 10th Amendment sort of moment. No matter what you think on the underlying issue, putting the Feds into states business was troublesome and I would claim that is the beginning of the end.

______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !

speak english

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

was used to review due process in state death penalty cases.

The 14th says LIFE can't be taken absent due process. The state sought to take schiavo's life via a legal process.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Witness today's California SC ruling;
- The people vote
- THe court nullifies that vote by fiat
- CSC Chief is a Republican as is the governor
Is this democracy? What of the Republican brand?

"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report

but I will. In the meantime, eat a Floridian!

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Ann Coulter told Glenn that she is making her prediction now that losses by the GOP in Congress and/or WH will be blamed entirely on the conservatives.


The purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better.
Dr. Theodore Dalrymple

Of course conservatives will blame moderates and moderates will blame conservatives.

But pork barreling earmarking is not an ideological problem. It's a corruption problem.

Delay. Hastert. Cole. Boehner. These are not moderates. It's not like Specter and Collins are running the Rs in the Senate.

I don't think it's a "conservative" problem, but I do think it's a lot harder to argue that being unpopular due to corruption and the War is somehow caused by moderates.

The leadership has been conservative and corrupt. It's the latter that hurts, not the former.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

colleagues for unpatriotic enemy emboldening speech for 4 years.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Corruption is by definition not conservative. Someone who is corrupt is not acting in accordance with conservative principles. The two are mutually exclusive. Which is one reason I keep getting snappy about the difference between someone who votes with and is identified with conservatives vs. someone whose policies and votes come from a conservative core.

Fine, but you can't just start calling people moderate because they are corrupt. Then it's tautological that all the problems are "moderates" because you're defining it that way.

I agree that conservatives are acting poorly but that doesn't make it a "moderate" problem. It's a problem that conservatives have become corrupt. Elect New Conservative who promises not to be corrupt doesn't fix the problem unless we fight the root cause of that corruption.

Oh and if we're defining stuff this way then I will assert that anyone acting corruptly is not in accordance with moderate principles and thus cannot be moderate.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I am absolutely baffled by your insistence on this crap. I was agreeing with you for God sakes.
Corruption is antithetical to conservatism. I am not saying conservatives are white as the driven snow, I am saying that when they are corrupt, they are acting against conservative principles.
I'd like you to explain to me how I used the word moderate. Show me when I suggested that anyone was a moderate?

of the one-size-fits-all solution to GOP problems is "kick out the moderates, run further to the right." It may be right in some cases, but it seems to be reflexive for a lot of people. And one corollary is that if there is a problem, they can no longer be "conservative."

Bush was considered a conservative until he got unpopular. Then people started pushing to nominate a "true conservative" who would of course be perfect.

Then the conservative leaders became corrupt and flush with power. So now we can't call them conservative b/c they are imperfect.

I just wish we'd focus on the problem (corruption) instead of blaming it on conservatives or moderates. Rs need both conservatives and moderates to win. Neither is a majority. But for some reason, a lot of people don't like that.

If those aren't your views, sorry for jumping on it. But you espoused one key part of that worldview (i.e. conservatives can't be corrupt) which I think is part of the problem.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

The only area where I would possibly disagree with you is that I think a few people were honest enough to admit that Bush was not a conservative even before his popularity plummeted.

*****
Unrepentant Black nationalist, Unapologetic Black conservative!

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

We cannot know when we recruit candidates if they will go rotton.

What we can do is follow the Rham Emanuel strategy and do opposition research for October surprises of our own.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Yikes...variation on a theme if you ask me.

I prefer a Republican Congressional and Senatorial Kangaroo Court. Fines for being nice or saying nice things about Democrats....whoops sorry...must learn to say more bad things about Democrats.

______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !

You keep assuming I mean something rather than just responding to what I say. I never thought of Bush as a true conservative. In fact, in 2000, I was originally for McCain, because he appeared to be the conservative in the race.

I did not say conservatives can't be corrupt. I said corruption is not conservative. You see conservative and moderate and whatnot through the lens of modern punditry. I see it in classical terms. Pork and corruption are not compatible with conservatism. Though I know we've hashed this 100 times, traditional conservatism is not a spot on the meter. It is a certain set of principles.

I never used the term moderate. I did not say moderates are corrupt. Clearly someone could be moderate and corrupt without any inherent contradiction because a "moderate" is someone who doesn't take a strong stand, but moderate is not equal to non-conservative.

And to your first point, we don't need to run further to the right. We need to get back to the Constitution and drop the extracurriculars. More than that, we don't need to kick out the moderates, we need to bring them on board.

If John McCain wins, well, moderation is the answer. If he cannot beat a neo-Marxist lightweight who was a city councilman a few years ago, well, then there you go.

Moderates are now in control of the Republican party. We'll see what happens in November.

Boehner and McConnell are not moderates. And the pork barreling corruption can't be stopped by McCain alone. Fortunately we nominated the most anti-pork of the possible nominees. If one were making the argument for moderates, it might be that the biggest anti-porker was a "moderate."

Regardless, moderates don't "control" the party and it's funny to hear that. Porkers and elite conservatives are still very much in control. And after the 2006 swing districts went D, the moderate Rs are at the lowest point in a long time.

That may be good or bad, but the idea that moderates run things is quite silly.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

"And the pork barreling corruption can't be stopped by McCain alone."

These are not conservative principles (pork and corruption), so I would say that those who are engaging in them are not conservatives. I don't know what they ARE, I just know what they are NOT, regardless of what they say.

Check that. I do know what they USED to be - Democrats.

As for who is in control of the party, if they are conservatives, then they are what I call "Cafeteria Conservatives" - I'll take, say, a little fiscal conservatism here, a little defense conservatism over there, a little more on a small dessert plate - that's all, thanks - and call myself a "conservative". These people, in actuality, are moderates who swing right on certain pet issues. And yes, I believe they are in control of the Republican party right now.

Whenever a conservative screws up, they become a moderate. Well that sure isn't self-serving, now is it.

If we're redefining conservative to mean the 6 people who are perfect, then it's no longer 35% of the country. It's like 5%. I guess that's fine but I don't think that's how the word is generally used, what people mean when they call themselves conservative, or what the public thinks about the Rs and conservatives.

So I would recommend spending some time making sure the redefinition sticks.

Let me know when Sen. Minority Leader Snowe and Speaker Shays are in charge and I'll believe you that "moderates" run the place.

And only b/c people will make presumptions, let me say that I'm not advocating they should be in charge. I'm just saying that they sure as heck aren't.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I don't know who they ARE, just who they AREN'T. For instance, a serial murderer who says he is a Christian should not be believed because he certainly isn't acting like one.

And I guess we have ourselves a mystery, because I am a conservative, and do not feel the Republican Party currently represents a thing I stand for. Of course, like the serial murderer, they may SAY they do, but actions have spoken otherwise for a while now, from the top down. Republicans have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory since 1994.

Since I can see where this is going, I will disengage, but will just remark that I consider Snowe and Shays liberals.

As I'm writing this there are 70 comments but yours seems the most appropiate for me to link to. You miss my point and I think the point of many other posters here. We see the death of our party because it fails to try to achieve the goals it espouses. Not because it includes moderates etc.

When Reagan was leading us out of the wilderness of ineffectual 60's and 70's conservitisim it was with a message of small government, individual responsiblity, and a sense of faith in the inate goodness of America and Americans. We were energized because the principles he brought forth coincided with our understanding of our founding documents. We became convinced obtaining control of Congress would allow us the oppurtunity to enact legislation that would return the power to where it belonged.

With the 94 election we were almost there but Perot kept us out of the oval office for 8 years. At least we could console ourselves with the fact that our control of Congress was responsible for the policies that led to the economic boom of the 90's.

Finally, in 2000, we got our goal and despite senators changing parties in 2004 we had total control. After more than a quarter century the revolution had succeded. What did we get? 2 supreme court justices and Nothing, Nada, Zip. We spent more money than ever. We still can't access many of our resources. We failed to deliver on most every plank of our platform.

It's not that moderates or conservatives are in control. It's that, for me, the party failed to even try to do the things I had voted it into power to do.

Your typical Spartan warrior clinging to spears and gods:

You're assuming Leadership Position = Control. While this may be the case, it isn't necessarily.

Yes, a few of the people in leadership currently are conservative, but on the issues that conservatives are upset about, it was the moderates who controlled what happened. Since Reagan has been out of office, the Dems have consistently voted as a block, and they win votes when they pull the squishies to the liberal position. The position of the Republican leadership has consistently been 'we can't discipline the squishies, we can't even offend them, because if we do, we won't even win some of the votes.' This is not a position of control, this is a position of being controlled. That means the squishies have been controlling things even though some conservatives have been in leadership positions.

Certainly, Boehner and McConnell are not moderates. I had the chance to be at an event with Boehner recently and he hit on all the right themes. Nonetheless, I would submit both he and McConnell are ineffective leaders.

The party agenda and more importantly the message is in complete disarray. I would argue much of that is due to moderating the agenda, obfuscating the message and leaving our principles twisting in the wind. In that latter regard, I understand a bit upthread, Hooah Mac's point; that is corruption, albeit agnostic to philosophy is inconsistent with conservative values. If you stick to those core principles without becoming and inflexible ideologue it is a winning combination since it represents a consistent approach.

As we stray, vis-à-vis corruption, big government, lack of fiscal discipline, etc. we lose our brand and credibility. That's where we are today. So, the cure proposed by our party and primary system? Run a middle ground moderate who touches on some conservative principles to drag us along. To be frank, that continues our stalemate by further identifying the party as a crossover philosophy. History shows, that is a recipe for disaster since as stated before you become "either all on or the other".

I am certainly not saying, as indicated here by some, that we do not court and continue to include moderates, independents and others. Considering their views is essential to success. However, we should be leading the way philosophically and not demurring for the sake of coalition building. That is not a forceful exercise, it is intellectual. Adopting a substantial part of the middle ground gives voters nowhere to go and obscures party lines. We need a strong leader and disciplined message; unfortunately I don't see any individual currently at the forefront able to fulfill that role.

"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report

dem says bushlied, demands surrender for 48 months
enemy hears and fights on
more americans die

hot repub calls out the dem for unpatriotic language on live tv

cold repub agrees with dem

lukewarm that God spues out of his mouth - repub says he disagrees with his honorable friend

americans see spineless repubs

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Democrats and Independents? Broad coalition? Remember?

You guys own the party now, and have a strategy of winning in November by appealing to moderate Dems and Independents. Why do you care what conservatives think, or even if we are in "the big tent"? Hasn't the electorate passed us by?

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

McCain supporters?

Republicans?

Anti-porkers?

Because only answer 2 is in "control" of the party right now. I'd prefer that anti-porkers were in control, but they aren't.

The big tent means conservatives and moderates. But your attitude seems to prefer the 100 perfect Rs in the House with 345 Ds than having a chance at winning. That seems to be the general tenor of the "true conservatives."

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I am conviced it will be right-wing conservatives who are unwilling to live with their more moderate brothers that will be the downfall of the Republican Party.

Why not prove Ann Coulter's prediction wrong?


The purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better.
Dr. Theodore Dalrymple

But I am a bit startled by parts of it. During the Bush years a lot of center-right types kept their public differences to a minimum while helping get Bush elected. Now when it's the far-right's turn to do that, they are up in arms about not getting their guy as the nominee.

Teams only work if everyone goes by the generally agreed upon rules. Rs should be working to help the R win (or at least not trying to help him lose). A lot of conservatives are sounding more like Christine Todd Whitman than like Reagan with respect to loyalty and support.

I don't think it will be the "downfall." That was corruption and pork-barreling. But it could prevent the Rs from being a majority party. Conservatives (broadly defined) are 30-35% of the country. And that's accepting everyone who calls themselves a conservative (i.e. McCain). If you start applying purity tests, then you're under 20 or 10% of the country. That alone can't be a majority.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Mr. Compassionate Conservative himself was moderate. Don't claim conservatives got their way and moderates had to compromise. Conservatives had reservations but got in line because they understood he was a way better pick than Gore. Now the moderates are pulling even harder left in McCain and changing history to say "We shut up and got in line for you conservatives when Bush was the winner". Bull. Bush was a fine compromise between the two groups. McCain is just barely a compromise.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

but McCain went off the reservation. The last two still hold for most Republicans though (limited status of course) but unfortunately, only for the voters, not for the Republican party.

Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."

I don't know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember well the miserable days of Bob Michael and the gutless Rockefeller Republican minority. All I can tell you is that they weren't conservatives.

This is deja-vu all over again.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

McCain was around in those days. He was solidly on the Reagan side of the Reagan-Rockfeller divide.

There really are no Rockfeller types left in the R party (for better or for worse).

Since when did anti-pork, pro-life, pro-troops, pro-marriage, small government Rs become "Rockfeller" Rs.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

He can wave all of those small government R credentials in our face, but as the wives say, it's not what you say, it's what you do. He's good on spending you say? Then explain to me how his insistence to park his butt in Al Gore's church of spending is being fiscally conservative. His Cap and Trade plan is fiscally irresponsible and its spending money based on environmental scares. And what about his desire to sign the Kyoto Treaty? Is that more fiscal discipline from the Maverick as he lets Europe dictate American economic policy, bending over to the environmental extremists and raping the taxpayer. But then again, what do I know-I'm just a conservative that the Maverick thinks is "out of touch with reality". Good thing he's got Huckabee on the top of his short list to ease my concerns. NewTone is dead-let the new era of BiPartisanship reign! Hurrah

The trouble with our friend McCain isn't that he's ignorant, its that he knows so much that isn't so.

DON'T DO IT!

Every man for themselves! BR The Brave can't be saved, but you can save yourselves!

Sigh.

--------------------

Small is beautiful.

I am stark raving mad. Bonkers. Should be in a straightjacket. Sorry.

At least one of the leading conservatives in the Senate is putting attention squarely where it needs to be - on the New England Patriots. If THAT doesn't lead Republicans to victory in November I don't know what will.

In other words, you expect that the Republican nominee actually goes after Democrats and not his own party. Pssh-then how could he be the BiPartisan Maverick, woohooo.

The trouble with our friend McCain isn't that he's ignorant, its that he knows so much that isn't so.

That's certainly not a disposition that will resolve this conflict or lead to intellectual discovery.

Nowhere, have I said there is any regret of a move towards moderates, et al. It is the philosophy and leadership which has created the void and accompanying exile.

Basic conservative values appear to be an afterthought in most party decisions. We constantly use negative issues on the opposition as a means of defining ourselves and highlighting differences; hardly the best means to espouse our values.

Your opine about "right wing" and "conservatives" is exactly the type of rhetoric bringing us to this juncture. That latter comment is not philosophical, it is an intellectual observation.

We need to come together with a stronger coalition of ideas and philosophical values that represent a plurality of this nation. In that process the current house will absolutely fall.

"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report

it's not a conservative vs. moderate thing. It's a power thing.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

...I don't see why the retention of power and the advancement of the conservative agenda need to be mutually exclusive.

The irony of this is that, IMO, the Republicans would still be in the majority if they'd have governed as conservatives.

Let's keep in mind that the Democrats held the majority in the House for some 4 decades while steadily advancing their liberal agenda.

but then George W Bush occurred to me. He's under a term limit, and look at his lack of restraint. I think with POTUS the "history" thing comes into play - "how is history going to view me?" So guys like Clinton and Bush try to do things that they think will portray them in a positive light in generations to come. The problem is that if you haven't been acting in that way for the prior 6+ years, two years of "cramming" isn't going to help.

I do think that term limits would help in Congress, however. But that poses a different problem: how do we come up with good candidates to fill all those holes that would open? We can't find decent candidates as it is - that would really cause a void!

it would seem to me to rest power from the candidates and put it in the hands of campaign machines more. I think we would start to see the George Soros candidate of the week more than a guy who actually has a reputation to maintain. Please feel free to tell me why I'm wrong.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Back when term limits seemed a novel concept that showed the longer an office holder was in office the more likely they were to try and solve problems by spending money.

This was in dead tree media, I have no idea where to even start looking for it on the web. (If I still had access to lockheed's dialog service I might be able to make an attempt but that would be expensive and not necessesarily fruitful)

It does have the ring of truth though. It affirms basic observations of human nature.

1. If you have a hammer the world looks like a nail.
2. Solving problems is hard spending money is easy.
3. If you give people money they will pretend to like you, People like to think they are liked.

that people start to get worse the longer they are in power, but do we have any examples (translation: I'm too lazy to find them) of term limited representation that didn't result in a worse situation? Also, doesn't it seem like forcing other states to pick different representatives is a bit over the top? If they want the same guy again and again and ... who are we to say they can't? I don't know.... The whole thing just looks like the cure may be worse than the disease just like anti-pork legislation or anti-corruption legislation (McCain-Feingold). From a programmers perspective it looks like someone wants to add in redundant measures that will actually be more restrictive (ie you already have the power to vote the guy out, so why would you make a law preventing you from ever keeping a good guy in?)

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

since I deal with software requests like these all the time.

A user hits 'Delete' on a file and the messagebox popped up to confirm the deletion and they hit the wrong button, thus the file is not deleted. This is considered a 'problem' by my boss. He says, don't put so many steps in there, just make it delete after the single 'Delete' key stroke. I say, "What if they hit it by accident?" He says "We'll train them not to" or something else to let me know that life will go on and everything will be better. My response is "No, it acts as a safety measure. Train them to use it better so that life will be easier." Now obviously I don't tell my boss what to do, but do you see what I'm saying? They are up for reelection at the end of every term. If we think they are getting stale, why not just confirm that we want to delete them? We have the power. Otherwise we risk losing actual really good reps we wish we could keep.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Remember how down & despondent Republicans were in 1976 & 1992? Things can change quickly if we act, & true positive change is done from the grassroots upwards.

[...I'll buy it. I've left enough of the attempt-at-plagiarism up so that anybody who's really interested can go look up the whole thing; otherwise, try thinking for yourself next time, schmuck. - Moe Lane]

Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage?

I don't remember your name before-and by the way I agree with you. I've had more than enough of this.

The trouble with our friend McCain isn't that he's ignorant, its that he knows so much that isn't so.

There's a conundrum for conservatives: if McCain wins, his brand of Republicanism is seen as the way forward and the party clearly moves left on a number of vital issues. If he loses, then we're going to be getting a very liberal president with a huge majority in Congress for at least two years....and all sorts of awful legislation.

It's clearly a Hobson's Choice for conservatives -- but I've little doubt that the former choice is better than the latter one.

If you need just a little something to calm your nerves: William F. Buckley gave a donation to one and only one Republican presidential candidate before he died. That candidate was John McCain.

If it's good enough for WFB, it's good enough for me.

Bill Clinton moved significantly towards the center, and that won the election(s) for him. But what did the Dems do in the next two elections? They nominated candidates that were significantly left of Clinton. And they've gone substantially farther left with the Obamessiah. Now one could argue that Barry is a result of overreaction to BDS. However, I believe that "the party," whether it be GOP or Dem, consists of individuals, and those individuals will not change their ideology based on whether some schmuck wins the Presidency. They believe what they believe...and that's why the Dems are throwing flaming liberals onto the ballot - that's what they believe, and they didn't learn a thing from Clinton.

--------------------

Small is beautiful.

Personally, if the choice is between my political party (the GOP) and my country (the United States of America), then my personal choice is easy. I enthusiastically and unhesitantly choose my country!

Although John McCain fails my personal yardstick of conservatism in several important ways, he is still more conservative and a better human being and far better for this country than either of the two remaining potential Democratic nominees. For those reasons, I will enthusiastically vote for John McCain this November!

This country is too important to be handed over to the Leftist or the Marxist!

Indeed, at the risk of the wrath of RedState falling on me, I personally think McCain is more conservative and will ultimately govern more conservatively than the present occupant of the White House. Our party moved to the left when the GOP President and GOP Congress moved to the Left for the last eight years and we "rank and file" did not say anything out of a misguided sense of loyalty.

*****
Unrepentant Black nationalist, Unapologetic Black conservative!

McCain isn't going to take us to the Right on anything. His decision to park his butt in Al Gore's Church of Global Warming via Cap and Trade and signing Kyoto is going to rape the American economy and overide and gains he would have made from spending cuts. Moreover, unless he does what Fred advocated, cutting entitlements, the earmark veto is going to make him look good for his friends in the media, but it is nothing more than a drop in the bucket in terms of cutting actual spending. If I may quote Neil here, All pork combined is 1% of the budget, using the pork figures defined by CAGW and the total budget figures from CBO, and they're anti-pork. And earmarks don't even increase spending. So McCain is up in arms about 1 percent of the budget. Shocking to hear. Now when he starts to oppose sitting in Gore's church, slashing NCLB, killing Pt D, putting ending SS at the top of his agenda and generally calling conservatives "out of touch with reality", I'll by he's gonna move us to the Right. We have a Leftist, a Marxist and a Scoop Jackson liberal Democrat. 8 years until Bobby Jindal saves us all...

The trouble with our friend John McCain isn't that he's ignorant, but that he knows so much that isn't so.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

In terms of McCain voting with his butt just like Obama-I'd blog on it, but its been a bit tense on that issue lately.

The trouble with our friend John McCain isn't that he's ignorant, but that he knows so much that isn't so.

on small govt yak yak

that could destroy this country and I think the prospect of these three candidates is hurting investment now

Mike DeVine’s