May 23 2008
The Fight Over The Future Of Conservatism And The GOP Is On
See Update Below
Well, it started back in 2006 when Bush nominated ex-democrat (wasn’t Reagan an ex-dem?) Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court and the far right went ape. The far right rose up again on Dubai Ports World’s selection to run some US docks. Even though the UAE, home of DPW, hosts the largest US naval port in the Middle East, some felt those Ayrabs were too much of a threat to be allied to have majority ownership (no dock hands of course) in a company that loads and unloads ships. The ignorance on how things work demonstrated at the time was stunning – and ugly.
Then came a real issue, a national issue. Then came comprehensive immigration reform and the far right went ballistic and called all who disagree with them traitors, un-American and worse. Compounding their disgusting behavior towards political allies (acting like Sadrists to Maliki’s Shiites) they basically started lying to themselves and America about what was in the bill, what was the utility of existing laws, and equating all immigrants with the few bad apples all populations have. In the irony of all ironies the bad apples they held up as examples of the evils of immigration were the very ones they insured would stay around as they stopped a bill that would deport criminals! Great thinking there.
Now that issue is back because all those who opposed comprehensive immigration reform have fallen by the wayside since 2006 and 2007. The standard bearer of the hard line crowd on immigration, Tom Tancredo, lost his bid for President and his seat in Congress. Many others followed his example and the one left standing is John McCain. McCain, like Bush and many other republican conservatives (as opposed to ‘true’ conservatives), supported the comprehensive bills proposed in 2006 and 2007. He supports it now. Bush has done more than any other President to seal our borders, turning back 1.3 million illegals last year alone. There is no more catch and release plan. Caught and sent home.
Now is the time to deal with registering workers and those who have been here a long time making a living as undocumented workers. Now is the time to register foreign workers and remove the underground economy that can not only hide 20 million illegal immigrants for decades, but hide cells of terrorists. It is time to step away from the fringes on the right and left (who have unrealistic desires with no public backing) and deal with the problem realistically. And that is what McCain is going to do:
In yet another sign of his pivoting toward the general election, Senator John McCain said at a roundtable with business leaders here today that comprehensive immigration reform should be a top priority for the next president.
Mr. McCain’s willingness to address the issue was striking given how the topic became something of a third-rail for Republican presidential candidates during the primary.
The response by the far right was predictable and swift – and signaled the final chapter in the purity wars of the conservative movement. Either the purists win and the GOP goes into terminal minority status or the broader coalition wins and progress is made through compromise and teamwork. Personally I already know the answer because politics in a democracy only divvies out power to those who make broad alliances and who can compromise. Ideologues who demand everyone bow to them always end up on the margins.
If McCain wins he will have made clear that the GOP and conservative movement can achieve success without the ‘true’ conservatives. I am an independent conservative. I have resisted joining the GOP for decades because of the purists. It is a combination of being repulsed by their arrogance and completely unimpressed with their solutions. Arrogance needs to be backed up with something, and there is not a lot there in many cases (not all of course, and I am focused on leaders and leading voices). I actually have no dog in this fight accept to find the best opposition to liberal policies. I don’t look for the purist conservative because the world changes to much and too fast to lock into one concept. It is a false sense fo security some seek in defining rigid dogma.
It is not my path, nor the path of many. Who will win? In the long run the ‘true’ conservatives will lose. the question is whether a short term success can be won when fighting the liberals on the left and the fringes on the right. I think this is the year of the centrists where America shrugs off the fringes and marches to the center to get some problems solved.
Update: Some other folks people should be listening to on this matter of whether there is a conservative GOP (big tent) or only ‘true’ conservatives (pup tent). The Anchoress, who is leaving the GOP, and Harold Hutchison, who links other voices who have decided the purists are not the future.
If I may be so blunt as to remind those on the right that we are at war with religious fanatics who demand purity to their views at gunpoint. I am not equating Islamo Fascism with ‘true’ conservatives. I am only pointing out that a country which is tired of the war on fanatics, but sees no path out except to keep soldiering on, may take its frustrations out on the next best example they can find and impact.
There is too much demand to toe-the-line on ideological grounds for this nation to stomach anymore. By far the most cancerous and destructive variant comes from the Jihadis. But the endless griping between far left and far right is not earning respect or support either. At some point America is saying enough to the purists, we are going back to the respect on peaceful coexistence of diversity and impurity.
The reason the far right is losing so badly is they have not given up their purity wars. We are a war weary country and would trade diversity and peace over anger and fighting any day of the week. Just as the Iraqis are settling into their diverse, common ground to end the real fighting there, America is doing the same. With or without the fringes.
66 Responses to “The Fight Over The Future Of Conservatism And The GOP Is On”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
[...] The Beltway, Sister Toldjah, Hot Air, The Strata-Sphere, Riehl World View, Jules Crittenden, The Politico, QandO, Stop The ACLU, Macsmind, American [...]
It’s good to see some people standing up for what is right.
[...] Toldjah, Outside The Beltway, American Power, Hot Air, PrestoPundit, Riehl World View, Donklephant, The Strata-Sphere, Jules Crittenden, Political Byline, No More Mister Nice Blog, The Sundries Shack, QandO, The [...]
Looks like AJ’s worrying about his “Centrist Movement” again. We haven’t seen someone push a bogus position this hard since OJ’s tireless efforts on the golf course looking for Nicole’s murderer.
I hear so many people twisting Reagan. Yes, HE had conservative values BUT he didn’t criticize others for NOT having them. He never campaigned to shove those values down people’s throats. THAT is why so many Democrats crossed over and voted for him. He campaigned on conservative economic and defense values and left the social issues alone. He campaigned on a platform of getting government’s hand out of our pocket and being proud to be American again and that our values were a good thing. Reagan signed off on the largest immigration amnesty ever and people should read his shining beacon on the hill speech.
Reagan was TOLERANT of other social values. But he was NOT tolerant of the government thinking that the people’s money belonged to government or that America was to blame for the world’s ills.
The worst distorter of the Reagan legacy that I hear daily is Hannity. I wish he would go back and read the papers from that era and recall what OTHER Republicans were saying about Reagan. They pretty much hated him. George HW Bush ran for President against Reagan in 1980 and called Regan’s economic plan “voodoo economics”.
People … we are not going to become a fascist state. It is a physical impossibility to rip literally millions of people out of the workforce and ship them out of the country. It just isn’t ever going to happen and the harder one words toward that end, the more likely the OPPOSITE will happen.
If anything, I think PoliBlog’s on to something.
http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=13698
If there was truly support for the hard line that Malkin and Hawkins demanded, why is McCain the nominee? Why has Chris Cannon managed to survive two attempts to primary him (2004 and 2006), winning by pretty decisive margins?
If anything, it seems a majority of Republican primary voters back President Bush on this issue over Malkin, Hawkins, and Tancredo.
CP, Just playing Devil’s advocate here:
Immigration is a big social issue,
Reagan never shoved anything down anyone’s throat because he knew how to sell the conservative viewpoint but he was no compromising with any leftist idealogy,
George HW Bush was a centrist,
McCain is a centrist,
Enforcing one’s laws and protecting one’s sovereignty is hardly fascist,
Reagan may have been tolerant of other’s positions but in no way did that mean he would accept them,
Some of us lived through the Reagan era and certainly don’t need the media archives to tell us what actually happened. I assume Hannity lived through it as well.
Just some food for thought.
“Enforcing one’s laws and protecting one’s sovereignty is hardly fascist”
Agreed, but entering the US without following proper procedure isn’t a criminal offense. It is a breech of regulations but not a crime. Now, if you are deported and return, THEN you have committed a crime. The first time you are found here you have a right to a hearing and the judge can agree to allow you to stay. There is no requirement in statute that you MUST be deported.
The simple fact is that if a migrant has been here, learned english, has held a steady job, has stayed out of trouble and payed his taxes, I don’t have a problem with them staying. Those are the kind of people I WANT in the USA. You know what the fastest growing population of illegals currently is in the US? People from India who come here on a legitimate visa and stay. Where are you going to place THAT fence?
I was in the military during both the Carter and Reagan administrations. I was paying close attention.
CP, conservatives have no problem with “legal” immigration.
Your Indian analogy is a good one in that it points out the very flaw in the amnesty crowd that wishes to change the laws favoring one nation’s immigrant from another. Conservatives believe all immigrants should be treated the same…legally without any preference to their race, country of origin, or numbers.
since I’m too busy all day to note the “distortions” in your first paragraph alone…I will have to wait. But here’s a little tidbit on McCain’s “poorly worded immigration statement.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/23/team-mccain-immigration-statement-poorly-worded/
And by the way:
“Then came a real issue, a national issue. Then came comprehensive immigration reform and the far right went ballistic and called all who disagree with them traitors, un-American and worse. Compounding their disgusting behavior towards political allies (acting like Sadrists to Maliki’s Shiites)”
You have officially fallen over the cliff.
Also, still nothing from you on the language in that comprehensive immigration bill where the new laws would be followed and couldn’t be overturned by the judiciary…could that be because it doesn’t exist?
McCain HAS to keep the hard right on board. Otherwise, he’ll leak fatal numbers of voters who will either stay home or vote for a hard right candidate.
As right blogger John Hawkins said:
Well, of course he’s a liar, he’s Republican, I’m just surprised one of you guys could admit it. Chimed in right-wing darling Michelle Malkin:
The coup de gras comes from another right wing pundit, Greg Ransom:
.
Some candidate: a senescent senior citizen whose own party labels him a liar and a betrayer and a man without honor or integrity. And you think the Democrats are the ones with a problem???
AJ,
Some of us see very clearly your strategy…
If McCain wins it was because he didn’t need the far right. If Obama wins it’s because the far right wouldn’t get on board with McCain. Pretty slick…either way you win. It couldn’t possibly be that maybe those “centrists” or conservative democrats ended up voting for Obama instead of your “centrist” candidate, or that all of the far right still voted for McCain and it still wasn’t enough to win.
I know you say you’re an independent conservative…but you have said many times in the past that you didn’t leave the dems, they left you, and you didn’t leave the conservatives, they left you. Did you ever think that maybe neither of you left each other, that you were never one of them to begin with? That you’ve always been a “middle of the roader” and that neither party would change to suit you?
McCain has never said that he does not intend to secure the borders or enforce laws. The fact that he made a statement about immigration without reassuring the hardliners {yet again} that he is serious about immigration does not mean he is an open border fanatic.
Most Americans support some sort of immigration reform. If they were like Hannity or Tancredo or Malkin on this issue, conservative Republicans would not be a minority today.
So while some people refuse to see the obvious shift in politics away from the right, the voters themselves have made it plain. Conservatives need to accept this reality and adapt to it. That is how politicians like Reagan were able to succeed.
And I agree with crosspatch when it comes to Reagan. Personally I think the man would be outraged to see the way some people on the right have used his memory to advance their own agenda. It is not something he would have done to someone else’s legacy. He was no fanatic.
whippet:
And it is plain to see the strategy of many on the far right: Do as we say or we sit home and pout.
And if the Democrats win, who cares.
The following is from Morrisey at Hot Air , the first two paragraphs are a statement from McCain:
Senator Kennedy and I tried very hard to get immigration reform, a comprehensive plan, through the Congress of the United States,” he said. “It is a federal responsibility and because of our failure as a federal obligation, we’re seeing all these various conflicts and problems throughout our nation as different towns, cities, counties, whatever they are, implement different policies and different programs which makes things even worse and even more confusing.”
He added: “I believe we have to secure our borders, and I think most Americans agree with that, because it’s a matter of national security. But we must enact comprehensive immigration reform. We must make it a top agenda item if we don’t do it before, and we probably won’t, a little straight talk, as of January 2009.”
***************
McCain never pledged to give up comprehensive immigration reform. He pledged to secure the borders first, but even in the extensive quotes that John has in his post, he never promised to stop seeking a comprehensive solution for illegal immigration afterwards. Even in this sequence, he talks about border security first. I don’t see this as “breaking his security pledge”, as John puts it.
John and I have debated this before, and I know him to be an honest, impassioned, and effective advocate of strict enforcement policies, and opposed to any kind of normalization. If he chooses not to vote for McCain, he will make that choice with integrity and commitment. But not voting is a choice with consequences in a two-party system, and those consequences will impact a lot more than border security.
After November 5th, either Barack Obama or John McCain will be President. We can be politically correct and claim that Bob Barr or Ralph Nader could somehow overcome the combined weight of the Republican and Democratic parties, but realistically they can at best act as spoilers. Uncast potential votes for either candidate makes it more likely their opponent will win; conservatives who sit on their hands make it more likely that Obama will win the White House.
Does anyone believe that Barack Obama would be more committed to border security than John McCain? Not if they’ve paid attention. Obama is at best the same as McCain on immigration, and more likely to acquiesce to Democrats like Dick Durbin on another full-blown amnesty. Even if we consider that a wash, where else does Obama look better than McCain to conservatives?
* Spending? No. Obama wants to eliminate the Bush tax cuts and increase federal spending by another $280 billion a year, with an eye towards nationalizing health care.
* The war on terror and national security? Please! Obama wants to dismantle our nuclear deterrent, end work on missile defense, and do a full-scale retreat from Iraq just as the country has begun standing on its own for security.
* Foreign policy? Only if conservatives have suddenly discovered a desire for direct meetings with sponsors of international terrorism like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Castro brothers, Bashar Assad, and Hugo Chavez. Even Obama’s own allies think this a bad idea.
* Abortion? Obama voted to support partial-birth abortion.
* Judges? Obama voted against the confirmation of John Roberts, putting him in the minority of Democrats.
Whippet, absolutely correct! I would add that not only does AJ think he can have it both ways, he never bothers to ask himself if his centrist dogma is good for the Republican party or even the country! History shows that no movement to the left is ever good for the country or the party because it only engenders more leftism. Also by taking this absurd position, he casts the results of the past 40 years of presidental election results out the window in hopes of making his point. It never occurs to him that what is turning the American public off isn’t the conservative position but the rejection of conservative principles. His position also fails to take into account that most conservatives consider it their duty to vote and will be there for McCain anyway. For someone constantly chirping about compromise, amity, and unity, our host certainly does everything in his power to thwart it. An awful lot of one-sided hate there for someone who claims to be independent.
AJ
I have to disagree to some extent on Miers.
I don’t believe Bush really intended to carry her through to nomination.
I believe that he wanted to use her as bait to draw out all the players into exposing their positions before he then dropped the bluff and moved to his real nominee after she rightly fell by the wayside.
The rage from conservatives was simply due to the the fact that we had waited for so long for a nomination opening and then to look like it was going to be squandered on a person of little or no qualification for the position when people like Roberts were sitting in line was the issue.
Ahh here we go again
Even though I think AJ could perhaps get his point across by using a bit more sugar and less vinegar he is right. He is also I know reacting to the real hurt a lot of felt during the immigration balttes and the assorted things he mentioned.
What AJ is talking about is not really “Centrist”. There were many valid views on the immigration debate. One cannot really call people like Rep Flake to Jon Kyl , ot Brownback and Icons like the WSJ and the Cato Insititue “Centrist. Those all supported immigration reform. NO matter how many times people shouted McCain/KENNEDY or AMNESTY it did not change those facts.
The people that oppose Immigration reform have to deal with the Republican Exit polls we saw from the primary season. We see still after 3 years of debate people are divided. THe Hardline position of deport them all big and small policy rarely got over 50 percent. Even in the Redest of States
It did not help Romney that he was a hardliner. Even when my guy , Huckabee took a more hardline(which I thought was mistake) it not help him. Even the people’s allegiance to the hardline position is shaky. When it was largely a three man race in the Republican Primary McCain on a consistent basis got 25 percent of the deport them all crowd.
I suggest iot is time to compromise. I also suggest we quit fighting each other and get McCain and the rest of the GOP folks elected. We had a primary. It is over!!! LEt us all get on the same team. We can battle this out again another time
Merlin:
However, one would think that after Roberts and Alito they might stop crying.
Besides, if they let Obama win, what kind of judges will they get from him?
“conservatives have no problem with “legal” immigration.”
This is in reference to post 75
That is not exactly true. Many COnservatives have as their spokesmen the Tanton groups. Mark Krikorian of CIS over at the national review that is constantly issuing propaganda is a prime example of how people opposed to immigration are muddying the waters.
That is also a concern of many of us because we think that people have hijacked this issue for their own radical agenda
biglsusportsfan:
I think the left has manipuated some of this. There is Mickey Kaus, John Kerry supporter raising hell about McCain. I mean really, what was Kerry’s position? I think there are folks out there who want to split the Republican base and they are doing everything they can to sit Republicans against each other. And some folks seem to make it easy for them.
Tancredo said he wanted a “time out” for all immigration.
And I don’t think it is fair for people who are hardliners to assume that everyone who does not agree with them does not believe in the sovereignty of the United States or the law or whatever. A lot of people just think there are different ways to approach the issue.
Terrye.
Mickey Kaus is someone to watch. I do think he is a true believer in opposing immigration reform. However I do have to wonder since he says this is the issue of the ages why in the end no doubt he will endorse Obama.
biglussportsfan:
Yeah, I just do not trust the Kaus. I think he has an agenda of his own.
Just like calling this a flip flop from McCain. This is not a flip flop. People are just too touchy.
By Tancredo’s and Hawkin’s standards, Reagan was a flaming liberal.
Bigl, conservatives are on the same team. In fact, they’ve always been on the republican team. They are your stalwarts and anchors and always have been. It isn’t them you should be worrying about. It’s the fence sitters who think they can get a moderate position out of the left that we need to worry about. AJ and Terrye confuse the left’s ploys of putting up “moderate” candidates as an actual move to the center. Is it nothing of the sort. It is a con and scame on the voter base and AJ and Terrye have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. History has showed us that the middle of the road candidate doesn’t inspire voters to get out and vote, especially when they see little difference between the parties. This is the inherent danger in trying to create the “big tent”. What good is a big tent if no one cares to go camping?
“History has showed us that the middle of the road candidate doesn’t inspire voters to get out and vote, especially when they see little difference between the parties”
Well thank goodness McCain is not some simpy middle of the raod person. Needless to say he has Opinions
I see Terrye is back to bang the stupid drum again.
Roberts and Alito are conservatives, the very “fringe” Terrye constantly cries about.
Conservatives will not be “letting” Obama win. Terrye’s been barking this nonsense for weeks now.
Tancredo’s timeout for all immigration appears to be fairer than Terrye’s or AJ’s, who wanted reform simply because Mexico gave us the larger inflow of immigrants. At least Tancredo was fair to all immigrants, his fellow Americans including those who were immigrants, and to the law.
Terry’s goal to reform the law is all we need to know that she doesn’t respect the law. It is not a difference in approach with the right as she claims but an attempt to reform a law for political expediency, a sure sign of disrespect for any law.
Not only is McCain not just middle of the road, he is a man who is committed to this country. He is his own man.
And America does not vote for people they consider extremists, either.
They like people like Reagan or Eisenhower or even a Bill Clinton. It is not middle of the road so much as common sense that they look for.
Now I think Clinton has lost some of that, as did Nixon. But what did Nixon go after? The Silent Majority. He was wrong about a lot of things, but he was right about the Silent Majority. The fact is most people do not like too far left or right. I think it is probably just part of a two party system. In a parliamentary system where it is necessary to form coalitions it is easier to maintain purity as a fringe group. But our system is more of a winner take all kind of system and that requires some ability to compromise. That does not mean people sacrifice their principles.
“Tancredo’s timeout for all immigration appears to be fairer than Terrye’s or AJ’s, who wanted reform simply because Mexico gave us the larger inflow of immigrants. At least Tancredo was fair to all immigrants, his fellow Americans including those who were immigrants, and to the law.”
Tancredo Timeout is very suspect since the people that he is in bed with want to reduce the popoulation of the United States to 150 million. Needless to say I find that radical
75:
Like I said before, buzz off. And I liked Roberts and Alito even if Jorge nominated them and Juan voted for them.
The fact that some people are too dense to understand there is a difference between right wing hardliners and conservatives is not my problem.
The population of the US is over 300 million. I wonder what Tancredo intends to do with half of us? God only knows.
BTW, even Tancredo is supporting McCain.
I think that is what annoys me. some people on the far right want to take over the conservative movement. They assume that any criticism of them is a criticism of all conservatives. Not true.
“The population of the US is over 300 million. I wonder what Tancredo intends to do with half of us? God only knows.”
Good point
Bigl, I certainly hope you’re right on McCain. I haven’t exactly seen an outburst of support for him yet. Granted, it’s still early in the process.
“They like people like Reagan or Eisenhower or even a Bill Clinton.”
Talk about clueless.
Terrye, with all due respect to “buzz off” (how’s that for moderate and centrist compromise?), why don’t you fill us in with your wisdom? Just what is the difference between a right-wing hardiner and a conservative? Please, share your wisdom with us? Or can we expect another ‘buzz off’?
Terrye, that must just make you sick to see that your devil of all thats is unholy is supporting McCain. Kinda drives a wedge into your right-wing hardliner argument, doesn’t it?
Terrye, how can the far right or conservatives take over their own movement? It appears that the only people trying to “take over” are those who want to bastardize conservatism to their own centrist and moderate goals, in which case, it ceases to be conservatism? Apparently, you annoy yourself.
The difference? Pat Buchanan and Ronald Reagan, now there is a difference.
I am only pointing out that when it comes to general elections, the voting public tends to go center. That is why every freaking election cycle we see politicians going center after they win their primaries. I am not the first person to notice this phenomenon.
Another difference. A Republican president vetoes a bloated over budget pork laden farm bill and half his own party helps over ride the veto. John McCain said he would have vetoed the damn thing too.
But where were all those fiscal conservatives?
The truth is there are people on the right who have a problem with dissent in the party. Somehow or other they think they have the right to shove their opinions down every one else’s throats. Even when they can not find one single candidate they can support who can win a primary in the party they claim to run.
bastardize my ass. If people like 75 were the majority in the party, McCain would not be the nominee. But he is ergo…who is doing the bastardizing?
But, but, but … AJ they are so good at coining words. The fact that their “my way or the highway” attitude cost us the 2006 election and could guarantee a President Bambi seems unimportanti, do they care? Nah.
I’m no big McCain cheerleader, but I sure as heck am not about to add fuel to the other side’s fire and badmouth him. Of course, I’m not a “pure” conservative. In fact, other than in tax policy, I wouldn’t say I’m a conservative at all. I am a Republican, a solid moderate voter who views the implementation of socialism/communism a far more dangerous and important subject than a good package that includes immigration REFORM. I liked the President’s original 5-point plan and I still think it far superior than anything being offered by these critics. And, I have not one single doubt that when it comes to defending America, McCain will be there with all it takes, should that scenario arise.
I say take your ball and go home and sulk, but don’t dare say one word in complaint when you see moves to nationalize the oil industry, limit free speech, limit free movement, or are facing the barrel of a gun as the terrorists take over and tell you how to think, vote, conduct business, worship, etc.
Serious question for 75: I agree with you that Alito and Roberts are conservatives worthy of praise. However, how do you explain that the legal decisions they have written can be characterized as very moderate, even middle of the road, made to look “conservative” simply because they do not pay obeisance to the radical left? (yes, I read all the decisions)
Roberts has even sided with Breyer, one of the 4 arch liberals, against Scalia several times. How can that be, if he is such a conservative? (my answer: he’s a smart conservative, not an idealogue)
Even the voter ID case, reportedly an “extremely conservative” decision, was simply the application of ordinary common sense to the absolute legal insanity of the democrats position. The Constitution specifically allows states to regulate and control the election process, limited only by the restrictions of the 14th amendment.
For the Democrats to claim that showing ID was intentional racial discrimination was an absurdity of the nth degree – and yet a decision that simply said “hey guys, that position is idiotic as well as unconstitutional” comes off as some highlight of conservative thought. We’re at the point that a decision that says “2 + 2 really does equal 4″ is going to look like extremist thought.
Anyway, my point is that Roberts and Alito are both McCain/Bush type conservatives. They’re doing a good job, and the country is much better off having them in place than it would be without them.
[...] The Strata-Sphere provides interesting food for thought If I may be so blunt as to remind those on the right that we are at war with religious fanatics who demand purity to their views at gunpoint. I am not equating Islamo Fascism with ‘true’ conservatives. I am only pointing out that a country which is tired of the war on fanatics, but sees no path out except to keep soldiering on, may take its frustrations out on the next best example they can find and impact. [...]
I don’t know one person in my family and their neighbors in Orland Park, IL who express any euthesiam whatsoever for McCain.
They’re not so much Republican voters as they are Anti-Democratic Party voters.
They all *want* to like McCain but his “centrist” views turn them off, dishearten them, and demotivate any support they might otherwise have for someone running against the even more loathed Obama/Clinton.
The people I work with in the Loop see that Obama is a fraud and Clinton a liar, but no one exactly likes McCain either.. especially when he does bonehead moves like join the Global Warming bandwagan and spout the defiant support of amnesty.
This election will hinge upon who turns off the regular American the least as to attract their begudged vote and who repells the voter enough to drive them to not vote or do something like pointless like vote for Bob Barr/3rdParty the least
That’s what happens when you have a “moderate” Republican party.
I just do not want some marxist Democrat to become the next president. McCain is one of the most popular polticians in the country. Is he perfect? Hell no, none of us are..but right now he might be the best conservatives can do. And it would help a lot if they would stop eating their own. They need to get out of their own way.
McCain is so popular that he has to get money for his campaign from the government.
Since I have to vote against my vile Senator Durbin, I’ll be voting this year.. I’ll hold my nose , cover my mouth, close my eyes, block my ears, and plug my butt… and vote for McCain (not sure it will matter in Illinois) but it surely isnt because i want to.
Well, either McCain got a little carried away with his words or he is a liar……because he is back-peddling on his “comprehensive immigration reform” statement. He says his position is still that of the “purist conservative” …..to secure the border first.
I know McCain really wants to get the entire immigration issue settled federally. I hope he succeeds (just not too soon because the states/localities are sure cracking down on illegals like a bunch of crazy rasberry ants). If he secures the border first…..then we can fix the rest.
I am also ok if some emergency measures on a handful of issues need to be discussed/passed before that wall is built. They may need to ease up or speedline temporary worker visas, etc. But, it needs to be an open transparent discussion and a separate vote…….not a stealth sneak into the war funding bill.
———————————————–
I doubt this will mitigate the anger of bloggers like John Hawkins much, but Team McCain tells me there’s been no change in his stance on immigration — secure the border first, deal with other aspects of illegal immigration once the border is secure. Recently, McCain made comments that seemed to suggest he was eager to get to the second part, which conservatives and border security types are understandably wary about. ….
Team McCain tells me the senator’s comments were poorly worded. There’s been no discussion within the campaign of altering their stance on illegal immigration, and as far as everyone on the campaign is concerned, the policy is still, ’secure the border first.’
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/23/team-mccain-immigration-statement-poorly-worded/
What annoys me about the people running for President is that they’re all Senators.
If they think a policy was wrong.. or something ignored.. for goodness sake… CREATE A BILL and attempt to fix it!
Where have these people been for years? Where is the McCain-[Non-Existant Democrat] Border Security Act of 2008?
GOP strategists mull McCain ‘blowout’
By: David Paul Kuhn
May 23, 2008 05:20 PM EST
It sounds crazy at first. Amid dire reports about the toxic political environment for Republican candidates and the challenges facing John McCain, many top GOP strategists believe he can defeat Barack Obama — and by a margin exceeding President Bush’s Electoral College victory in 2004.
But the contours of the electoral map, combined with McCain’s unique strengths and the nature of Obama’s possible vulnerabilities, have led to a cautious and muted optimism that McCain could actually surpass Bush’s 35-electoral-vote victory in 2004. Though they expect he would finish far closer to Obama in the popular vote, the thinking is that he could win by as many 50 electoral votes.
Among the 10 strategists interviewed by Politico for this story, there was near-uniform belief that had any other Republican been nominated, the party’s prospects in November would be nil.
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=174C0DE5-3048-5C12-000617344734AAFE
“That’s what happens when you have a moderate republican party”..
No, that’s what happens when power goes to the heads of certain segments of the political debate.
And for the record, not a single solitary segment won the ‘00 and ‘04 election. There is NO MAJORITY of any segment: conservative, moderate, far right, etc. NONE. So stop with the intellectual dishonesty about having the power to put someone in office. It ain’t true. It takes all. Conservatives CANNOT win on their own. Tancredo can’t even get into double digits. Why? Why didn’t those with megabucks put their money on him? They could have! But didn’t.
I am so sick of this. I really don’t EVER want to play on a team with those who are trying to advance an ideolgy of pure conservatism. They are not team players – they are nattering nabobs of negativity and think they deserve to win all at all cost, America be damned. They cannot be trusted. They get what they want on 90% of the issues and then they say, “more, more, more!”Such spiritual arrogance.
So how is that different from the hard Left, I ask?
John McCain is not my first choice but I am supporting him because I can prioritize my desires and he ranks high on most of those. Not all, but most, #1 being the War on Terror.
I don’t call Malkin conservative. I call her strident. She has become the thing she hates, imho, and she is full of hate, imho. And, imho, like Ann Coulter, she has absolutely no desire to be in a goodfaith relationship with anyone other than her following. Enough already.
I’m not a 100%’er.
For example, I was perfectly willing to support Bush because, where it counted the most, he was doing the right things. Even though I knew when it came to government policy and the budget he was no different than the Democrats (other than tax cuts)
I know no politician can do it all. I dont expect any of them to.
I’m with Ann Coulter who has said… expect no more than 3 bedrock principles or objectives to be pursued by a President.. to want more is unrealistic.
What I didn’t anticipate was that the govt was going to get so out of control LARGE. What I didn’t expect was G Bush CREATING entitlement programs, not ending them.
What I didn’t expect was Democrat Party Values in the GOP.
George Bush responded to 9/11 in just the right way. His decision to take care of Iraq was completely justified..
But what has the man done since 2003? He let the Dems and Media lie about him , the country and the military since 2003 with absolute abdandon.
The foreign policy of the 2nd term is a complete disaster.
Our money is worth crap due to the deficits.
Republicans allowed themselves to be branded as Democrats.
Well when the choice is between Democratized Republicans and Democrats. why not choose the real thing?
McCains pamby mamby approach towards terrorists, as evidened by his desire to close Gitmo… McCains buying into the anti-capitalist designs of Global Warming alarmism… McCain’s tendendacy to turn on his supporters to appease the Dems, Left and Media…is just more of the same gutless and rootless Republican “leadership” that has been going on since the government shutdown in the Clinton years.
Since Bush has done nothing to sustain the public’s support since 2003 for at least his war policy .. all the gangre of the false hope of Republican-led government is now visible for all to see.
Enough already.
Deficits? Oh please. We have brought down that old booghie man, now really haven’t we? And for goodness sake, we were attacked at our World FINANCIAL Center! The airline industry, our absolute engine of our economy was severly close to death after the attack. The terrorists want to bring down economy as do the sorosite global socialists!
Unlike Hoover, George W. Bush knew that he needed to turn on the cash spickets and the results have been magnificent in terms of their intended goals: keep us out of a worldwide depression and for security’s sake, keep our economy humming. How long has the economy been growing???? We haven’t even had back to back contractions, no?
I mean, really, there’s just so much one man can do in the never-ending beauracracy of government, especially when he’s trying to get our military in top shape for our very survival, after a clinton administration’s cuts and neglect.
If you hate Bush, no amount of truth or fact will change that, imho. So be it.
And for the record, at least three things George did for conservatives: conservative Supreme Court nominees, no government stem cell research, cut taxes, ….there is much more like a strong military and the FISA court changes allowing the FBI to pass on leads, and bringing down the GORELIK wall at the FBI… but space is limited. (And really, he NEVER campaigned on immigration because it was NEVER an issue back then on the national level. But he also has not changed his views on that subject either. He believes he is right…as others believe they are right.)
Ya see, it’s always, more, more, more! Who cares about a war, just give me my next and newest pet social issue, I demand it!!
Ive, because conservatism errs on the side of constitutional liberty and freedom, why would you want any compromise in the leftward direction? Any compromise leftward is to give up more freedom, more liberty, and give more power to the federal government at the hands of the state or the people. If the center’s beef is that conservatives only want their way or the highway, it’s only because the conservative way fights for freedoms across the board, and that benefits all, including the center or moderates. I guess the point I would make to you is that if I as a conservative get 90% of what I want, which is more freedom for all of us, how could this possibly be bad for the rest of us, be it center, moderate, or even left? Why would you think that if conservatives get everything they want, you don’t get what you want?
WWS, my point in pointing out Roberts and Alito as conservatives was only to show Terrye that her ideas about “conservatives” and “far right” are utter nonsense. If it weren’t for the very “far right” she constantly bitches about, Alito and Roberts wouldn’t be where they are today.
Terrye, we’ve already covered why McCain is the nominee…and it has nothing to do with your ass. It does, however, have a lot to do with your own naivette so again, thanks for always being there to display it for us.
75:
Oh yeah that is right McCain is the nominee because Democrats locked all the Republicans in a closet and would not let them vote and then abandoned their own primary just so they could pretend to be Republicans and put the weakest candidate in for the Republicans because they were so SCARED of a real Republican like Tancredo.
At least I think that is how the theory works.
Talk about naive.
And if my ideas about what conservative and far right is are ridiculous, how do you explain the fact that I can support Roberts and Alito and yet not consider myself a fan of the far right fringes?
The fact that you refuse to understand that the purity war being waged by the far right is not something that is good for the GOP is just part of your own denial of reality.
75, first of all, I am a conservative who supports Roberts and Alito, who were considered by Ann Coulter as, Let’s see how conservative they are, I’m not sure they are conservative enough.
And I support the President’s immigration stance. I want english as our stated language. And I supported the Dubai ports deal.
And I supported his hardline stance on terrorists. Abortion is not one of my pet issues but, I do support the ban on third term abortions. And I understand what the President is trying to do regarding the global warming farse. I support the ban on gay marriage but would allow civil unions. I supported Terry Schiavo being kept alive. And by all means, cut taxes as much as possible and keep the government out of our business.
It’s apparently the SOCIAL conservatives who have more stringent views than me.
So who’s more conservative: fiscal conservatives, paleo conservatives, social conservatives, neoconservatives, Bush conservatives? Get mey drift?
It’’s been quite a coalition made up of Evangelicals ( who, on the whole believe in global warming!), social conservatives, religious right, fiscal conservatives, moderates and libertarians we have in the republican party.
See, as the proverb states, there is a time to reap and a time to sow. It’s not all black and white ALL of the time.
You’re not giving up anything of what you believe to govern this country as President when you realize that this is a country where 48% of the people voted AGAINST the conservative in ‘00 and ‘04. They actually voted for John Kerry, a true liberal. The President has to govern ALL the people and he can’t be a dictator (which is what a liberal will do!)
Jihadists believe that they are 100% correct all of the time and that all of us should believe as they do. They are not governed by the people, of the people or for the people. They are dictators, which is what I am saying many on the social right have become and don’t realize it. They are trying to hold all the factions in the republican party hostage and then crying that moderates are trying to do the same. Whether or not moderates are trying to do the same is up for debate, but I can say this: WE MUST WIN IN NOVEMBER. My children’s and grandchildren’s lives depend on it, not to mention our beloved America.
Nice post, Ivehadit. Pretty much my views across the board.
Thanks, WWS.
>75, first of all, I am a conservative who supports Roberts and Alito, who were considered by Ann Coulter as, Let’s see how conservative they are, I’m not sure they are conservative enough.
I supported them too.
>And I support the President’s immigration stance.
I agree with it generally in the abstract. I have trouble believing that a “Guest worker program” will enforce the “Guest” part… Europe had a “Guest Worker Program” and now they’re facing jihad from within their own broders.
The Immigration Bill that McCain drafted was a piece of crap. Why were there no hearings? Why was the public not allowed to participate in the drafting of the bill and the compromises?
Why was it treated like the 10 Commandments descending from the Mountain.
These asses in Congress have hearings for steroids by athletes but no hearings for something as critical as the future of our nation?
The Bill stunk to high heaven.
>I want english as our stated language.
Me too
>And I supported the Dubai ports deal.
I didn’t support it, but I didn’t oppose it either
>And I supported his hardline stance on terrorists.
Not hard enough. But he’s doing better than anyone else would.
>Abortion is not one of my pet issues but, I do support the ban on third term abortions.
Abortion should be “deConstitutionalized” and allow the States to settle their own policy. This is a Republic not a Judicial Tryanny.
>And I understand what the President is trying to do regarding the global warming farse.
Bush has Triangulated the Republicans into obscurity.
I want Leadership not Calculation.
>I support the ban on gay marriage but would allow civil unions.
I support the people and the State Legislatures deciding and not courts. In principle I oppose gay marriage.
>I supported Terry Schiavo being kept alive.
Me too. It baffles me that people complain about this.
> And by all means, cut taxes as much as possible and keep the government out of our business.
All tax cuts are going bye bye next year.. thanks for the tax hike, Bush and GOP Congress.
>It’s apparently the SOCIAL conservatives who have more stringent views than me.
The SoCons weren’t looking for much… but given their abuse by the GOP and the lack of follow up with any other of the pillars of Republican conservative base, the SoCons were the first to finally say BASTA.
>So who’s more conservative: fiscal conservatives, paleo conservatives, social conservatives, neoconservatives, Bush conservatives? Get mey drift?
Bush is not conservative. Cutting taxes and fighting our enemies shouldn’t really be something that we should thank our lucky stars a Republican has done… that’s the bare minimum!
>It’’s been quite a coalition made up of Evangelicals ( who, on the whole believe in global warming!), social conservatives, religious right, fiscal conservatives, moderates and libertarians we have in the republican party.
And all groups betrayed by that party.
>See, as the proverb states, there is a time to reap and a time to sow. It’s not all black and white ALL of the time.
The GOP has reaped the whirlwind or something.
Ask not for whom the bell tolls.. it tolls for the party of Lincoln.
>You’re not giving up anything of what you believe to govern this country as President when you realize that this is a country where 48% of the people voted AGAINST the conservative in ‘00 and ‘04. They actually voted for John Kerry, a true liberal. The President has to govern ALL the people and he can’t be a dictator (which is what a liberal will do!)
Uh huh.. just wait till Obama wins… you won’t hear any of this mamby pamby “lets rule as if we’re still in the minority” policy the Republicans have stuck to since the Govt shutdown.
>Jihadists believe that they are 100% correct all of the time and that all of us should believe as they do. They are not governed by the people, of the people or for the people. They are dictators, which is what I am saying many on the social right have become and don’t realize it. They are trying to hold all the factions in the republican party hostage and then crying that moderates are trying to do the same. Whether or not moderates are trying to do the same is up for debate, but I can say this: WE MUST WIN IN NOVEMBER. My children’s and grandchildren’s lives depend on it, not to mention our beloved America.
You make them sound like Leftists. Thanks to gutless republicans, there’s no one to fight the Left.
Ive, my thoughts exactly. 100% of Jihadists are wrong. 48% of Americans are wrong. And now the republican presidential candidate is someone willing to compromise with the 48% of America that is wrong. The republican party has entered that realm where pandering is more important to them than what’s right for or country. Enter, the centrist McCain, the candidate who’s greatest asset for being elected is that he’s not Obama or Clinton. And McCain will exit the same way all centrists do and America will go right back to looking for a strong conservative to lead the country back to the very place they abandoned so many times before. It matters little to me if the Terryes and AJs of the country believe it. It only matters that it’s happens again and again and again and they still don’t get it.
Terrye, you finally got something right.
You still don’t know why McCain is the candidate.
[...] sees no path out except to keep soldiering on, may take its frustrations out o… source: The Fight Over The Future Of Conservatism And The GOP Is On, The [...]