Always our Derb

Rod, much as I respect you, you happen to live in a country where 1.2 million children are killed in their mother's wombs each year.

Sitting this one out is not an honourable course, no matter what reservations one has about McCain.

How about both.

Well, at least that's honest.

So, it doesn't matter what else the candidate supports, or doesn't support. It doesn't matter what they do in their own lives, or where or how they'd spend the taxpayer's money, or send our sons and daughters to fight and die, or what for.

As long as they SAY (and sorry, that's all they usually end up doing) that they're pro-life, you vote for them, and if they don't say that, you don't. And four years later, when they say it again, even if they didn't do a darn thing about it, you still fill out the ballot the same way.. again.

It is, ironically, that exact attitude that insures NOTHING gets done, though a lot gets said about it.

The politicians have no investment at all in doing anything permanent about that issue. Because if they were to solve it (pass a law, or a Constitutional amendment), the pro-life stop voting (at least automatically) for them. As long as they talk about solving it, but it remains an issue, that crew just keeps on buying it, and keeps on voting, and he can concentrate on trying to please the crowd who have issues where they expect results, or they take their vote elsewhere.

The real question for Suckaboosters is how long do they encourage their man to be a shiny gift on a platter to the Manchurian Candidate? As Rich Lowry noted today, McCain has yet to win among persons who self-identify as Republicans. I've got to believe that most Suckaboosters would agree with Rod that Romney is the lesser of the two evils. But if the Huckster is still running next Tuesday, as I suspect he will be, look for the Manchurian Candidate to eke it out in the Southern states that should more naturally go to the redder of our purple choices.

On the other hand, a McCain nomination will, without a doubt, exile the GOP to the political desert for a decade during which time it might regain its soul.

Because I refer to Huckabee as Suckabee, or alternatively, the Huckster, or, in an informal environment, FF (Former Fatty).

There is no need to rehearse the shortcomings of McCain for me. I know them all like the back of my hand. But my non-negotiables are two: no pro-aborts, and no torture advocates. From the git-go, only one electable candidate cleared both of those hurdles. So, faute de mieux, he's been my man, and will continue to be.

rr,

I'm certainly not voting for Romney. But for those who feel compelled to vote for an electable candidate, when given a choice between two moderates, one who is old, angry, stubborn, and entrenched in his mis-guided opinions, and another who is Zelig, I would think the prudent conservative money would be on Zelig. There will be days that Romney will be standing near a conservative. That means there will be more conservative days of governance under a Romney's leadership than McCain's.

And I wonder how one can be supportive of ESCR and be considered strongly pro-life? A pro-life voting record at the national level basically means you would not cook a newborn child and serve him at a dinner party. I think it takes a bit more to be strongly pro-life. But I agree that GOP voters are voting for McCain for foreign policy reasons. On this issue I think they are greatly out of step with the country, which is one reason (coupled with a disgruntled base sitting out the election) that McCain will not win the general.

No doubt the GOP will have difficulty getting the base out this year. I could be completely wrong, but my sense among conservatives with memories has been that they are hostile to McCain and, like Hillary Clinton and her deep thoughts on nuclear energy, agnostic about Romney. Which I suppose means they don't know whether he exists. Which is a legitimate position given his lack of substance.

For those who tout McCain as a conservative, I would ask, "Did you support him in 2000?" Affirmative answers indicate the supporter is not conservative. Negative answers provoke the question of why not.

Rod,

"I hate to say it, but I'd be more likely to vote for Romney than McCain. I don't think Romney knows what he really believes. I think McCain does. I'm more worried about the latter than the former."

I understand your reservations about McCain (and share them), but from a damage control angle, isn't McCain a safer choice? I lack even the most basic sense of trust for Romney simply because I have no idea what he really believes, other than that he ought to be president. I trust McCain insofar as I know what I'm getting. Because of that, I'm less likely to lose sleep over a McCain presidency. Don't you wonder whether or not Romney would be even worse than McCain on the issues you cite, simply because he's an unknown quantity?

But the bottom line is that I'm quite sure the GOP will lose in 2008, and since Huckabee is most certainly out at this point, it'd take divine intervention for me to cast a vote this year.

There is no doubt in my mind that Ron Paul remains the only conservative in this race. We are slowly finding out that Ron Paul has been right on the issues of the day.

He says he wants to eliminate the Federal Reserve and he is laughed of the stage. Today though we are in a severe crisis mode brought on by Greenspans 1% fed rate. We are in the first inning of a severe recession. The Fed is incapable of fixing their screw up now and a lot of people will suffer. Folks the DOLLAR IS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE, WE ARE ON THE VERGE OF A CRASH. Only Ron Paul was grilling Greenspan when all this was happening, the others were calling him the "maestro". They same people who screwed it up are going to claim to fix it. Why not listen to the one that called it.

The war was a complete mistake. McCain says we should stay a hundred years if need be. What right does he have to commit future generations to this screw up. This is empire mode and all empires fall. Why are we trusting the ones who put us in this mess to get us out of this mess.

The list goes on. The only decent critiscism of Paul is an article written in a newsletter. Whomever wrote it was wrong and Paul should to the best of his ability review things with his name on it. At the same time, if you watch his campaign is about liberty and not about control. I disagree with the means and methods of many of his supporters. They are not an easily controled group. They come to him for his message though. If you watch him his message is his message. He does not waver and I beleive any allegations made of him to date are unwarranted.

Derb's still right about being a Ron Paul guy. He might not will the presidentcy but we will see how right he is. It's just a matter of time.

Let me see. If McCain gets his way, we have lots of little wars (we means we can make money playing the defense group), we get to keep our busboys and lettuce pickers, and the auto workers can collect unemployment.

I'm definitely voting for McCain!

From the article (Rod Dreher)

"I anticipate that he will be a player in Republican and conservative politics, and hope that he spends the next few years playing an active role in rebuilding the conservative movement."
_________________________________________________________

My response:

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.....deep breath....hahahahahahahaha....'nother deep breath....hahahahahahahaha....Huckabee...rebuilding the conservative movement...hahahahahahahaha....hahahahahahaha...wiping eyes. Thanks Dreher, you're ridiculous and delusional.

Huckabee is Pat Robertson in a Southern Baptist costume. But even at that, Huckabee's range of intellectual sophistication, understanding of political science, and novice grasp of the actual ideology behind genuine conservatism is so far inadequate that the only playing he will be doing is with with Evangelical poli-christ sycophants. He spent his dollar being vindictive and petty. He has no comprehensive understanding of conservatism and has one thing to offer just as I said, Pat Robersonisms and Falwellian ideology. Next Please!