The Corner on National Review Online
Either way it doesn’t really matter anymore, the McCain animus is deeply ingrained and apparently can’t be retracted. It only makes things worse either to attack sincere anti-McCainites or to ask them to reconsider, or to ask them to vote for the lesser of what they see as the two evils.
As they say, the die has been cast, and everyone will have to live with the results.
Yes, it has. And just as we who refuse to vote for McCain will have to live with the results, those who chose to ride McCain to defeat rather than find somebody a bit more palatable to conservatives will have to live with the results of that choice as well.
Oh, yes, they’ll blame us for their loss, and they will be correct to do so. We will withold from them the votes necessary for victory. But they will never think to blame themselves for refusing to nominate somebody we would like to vote for. And until they figure out the implications of that, they will continue to wander in the wilderness reserved especially for political losers.
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
They’ll blame us for the loss in November, but right now a lot of them are saying “screw you, we don’t need your votes.” Slamming the anti-McCain group right now seems more like a hissy fit (by and large) for not toeing the party line and harshing on their mellow, not because they actually think they need us. That’s why there are rumblings about social conservatives sucking up to McCain or getting shut out, for example. We’re nothing by party poopers.
Party poopers? Oh heavens, it’s far worse than that. According to Bill Whittle, if we don’t vote for McCain it’s Le Deluge! Yes, if we don’t elect a Republican president it will be TEOTWAWKI. Of course, the folks who now think we face The End Of The World As We Know It might have given more thought to their behavior back when we had Republicans in control of both houses of congress and the Whitehouse. Had they remembered their limited government “Contract with America” promises then they might be less desperate now.
And frankly, “vote for our candidate or it’s the end of the world” isn’t exactly the most rational campaign pitch I’ve heard lately. If that’s the best ya got I guess it’s going to be the end of the world, at least as far as you know it. Sorry about that.
It should be noted that their current desperation has nothing to do with responsibility in any way, shape or form, it’s shear terror that they’ll be out in the wildnerness with zero power at all — and that’s exactly where they belong.
If they’re able to trap some food while they’re out there, perhaps we’ll give them some matches (as they surely cannot rub two sticks together) so they can cook it, until then though…
Sheesh, did I say “shear?,” I meant sheer, of course — though either is apt.
I’m waiting for our erstwhile fellow travelers in the Republican party to start pulling the “you’re being divisive” line. May as well, seeing as how they are co-opting all the rest of the Left’s attitudes by throwing their lot in with Juan McCain.
“Anti-McCainites?” Screw You! I’m PRO-liberty and freedom and personal responsibility, and my right to bear arms, and my right to voice my opinion on political matters at any time and place of my choosing, and defending the integrity of my nation.
I’m holding all of YOU personally responsible for handing the country over to the Socialists, the racists, the welfare pimps and the illegals. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it (but only if Nanny McCain will permit you to, of course).
“Shear” is correct, because they’re about to be cut off.
They get incensed because for them it is Win-Lose. We support them they win. No conservative support and they lose.
For me it’s lose-lose. No matter if it is Hillary, Obama, and McCain we lose because all three are Big Mommy/Daddy Government. I think we get higher taxes and NationalHealthcare with all of them. When McCain says he is a Fiscal Conservative it means he cares about a balanced budget, not cutting spending. Faced with large budget deficits and no place to cut “compassionately” he woud do a Bush I and say “I’m Sorry but we must Raise Your Taxes”. That’s in addition to the raft of McCain-Far Leftist bills he’s already pushed.
Gang of 14 weighs heavily for me. If he opposed Republicans exercising power to get conservative government then, what would he do as President? I don’t know but I know it would not bring the country to the Right.
I find it amusing that the Party 1st people are screaming hysterically that everyone else should calm down and grow up. They demand loyalty from conservatives but McCain has never been loyal to us. He cut the conservatives off at the knees every chance he got. Well, payback is a b***h. I will not vote for him or give the RNC money. I can send money directly to conservatives in the house or senate races that I support. I agree with Coulter- w/o McCain the republicans will actually oppose Clinton or Obama. If there has to be a backstabber in the white house, then Hillary is it. Watching Hillary get revenge on the Obama supporters will be quite a show.
So much ado about almost nothing, it seems to me. It is so early in the campaign, the campaign has not even begun. I can hardly see the difference between the candidates on the repub side, or the dem side either, for that matter. But I know what my core beliefs are, and I actually believe that my vote means something. On election day, I will consider who will have the greatest effect on the future for me and my kids. The next president may get to appoint a few justices of the Supreme Court, which will have a greater effect than anything else they may do. On that issue alone, I am pretty sure I will be voting for the guy on the right, from a choice of two possible winners, no matter what I think, and more important feel, today. And so will most of you anti-McCain lib-con people, I predict.
If Ron Paul or another candidate we don’t expect emerges as an actual contender, that may make things different, but I will not waste my vote on a dream, and that dream looks more than unlikely, it’s a fantasy. (President Bloomberg?)
Michael, I seem to recall you thought the same rosy thoughts about the election back in 2006. How did that smashing GOP victory work out for you?
I received a call from McCain last night making all kind of promises. I really want to believe that he has seen the writing, but I’ve been burned before for giving a politician the benefit of doubt.
America has survived bad leadership before and it will do so in the future. I just hope that the Party begins to see that its base is unhappy with their behavior and abandonment of the core values that brought us all together. If not, maybe the ACP will be my new home.
Bill - 2006 is a straw man argument, we are talking about the race for president. I am quite satisfied with Roberts and Alioto, and supported the attack on Saddam’s Iraq. The last two Presidential elections went my way, and I want the next one to go my way as well, what with Breyer being 88 years old and Ginsburg having some serious medical issues. Long after we forget about some tax increase or new entitlement, we will still have Roberts and Alioto deciding cases in a manner far more acceptable to you and me, I am sure, than whatever some liberal appointee would decide. And do you think that Gore or Kerry would have held the line on taxes better than Bush, or stopped the prescription drug deal? Would they have been better on immigration? I can not be convinced that they would have been better than the admittedly treasonous Bush. I will take the lesser of two evils, rather than wasting my vote entirely.
Apparently you have no more understanding of “straw man” than you do of most other things.
You said,
You made similar predictions in 2006 when I said I - and other principled conservatives - would sit out that election.
You were wrong. We sat out, and the GOP got clobbered far worse than anybody (but us) expected.
You’re going to eat your words in November, too - along with those crap sandwiches you like so well.
Why should the party give a damn? It thinks it can count on its Michael Gershes, no matter what it does. And it’s right.
The thing is, not all the base is Mike Gersh and clones.
Some of you may have short memories, not I. I remember “Read my Lips, no new taxes” quite well.
There is really only one reason to vote for McCain. If he were to pick a VP I really liked, I might figure McCain’s health is such that he will not live for 4-8 years, and we would get the VP. ‘Course any VP McCain picked would be suspect. In any event, I’ll stick with the long term strategy. The rep’s are going to lose big time. Maybe they’ll get the message this time.
Bill - I said straw man, and I used it correctly. I speak of presidential politics, and you speak of 2006, not a presidential year.
From your favorite source, Wikipedia:
“A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. To “set up a straw man” or “set up a straw man argument” is to create a position that is easy to refute and attribute that position to the opponent. Often, the straw man is set up to deliberately overstate the opponent’s position. A straw man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent’s actual argument has not been refuted.”
You’re a moron, Gersh. The connection is direct, and perfectly apt, not straw. You are saying today that we’ll eat your shit sandwich, and you said the same thing two years ago. You were wrong then, and you are wrong today.
However, it has become quite clear that you are the sort of ob-com anal personality that has to have the last comment on any subject, and I’m tired of dealing with you.
You’re banned.
Go peddle your shit sandwiches elsewhere.