NotMcCain rally

So I’m here at the Romney rally waiting for him to show…

Burkhalter is emceeing – expect him to lose his title for not supporting the speaker’s candidate.

Im searching for someone who can articulate why i should vote for Mitt that doesn’t reference McCain. Not finding one here…..

Update: I’d say the turn out was about the same as the McCain event I attended on Saturday. The crowd was much younger, but given the venue that is not a suprise. I’d say the college age kids offset the fact that McCain’s supporters didn’t have to skip work to attend that even.

Hermain Cain made the introduction and Romney didn’t speak as long as McCain did the other night. Mitt focused on what is supporters wanted to hear: Economy and Imigration. McCain spoke on Earmarks, National Security and Character. Both told the “Change is what you’ll have left in your pocket after Obama’s tax plan is passed” joke.

98 comments

  1. Tommy_a2b says:

    Chris, it’s the economy baby!! Ever heard that line before? Vote for the Capitalist not the Crazy old dood who will cave on every liberal / liberal issue that comes to him.

  2. Ms_midtown says:

    snipet from the hotline
    http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/

    NBC/NJ’s Erin McPke, on the trail with Mitt Romney, is reporting that the candidate will not hold any public events Wednesday, as it is an “office day” for him.

    Meanwhile, this tidbit from McPike:

    After months and months of chartered travel, Romney is flying COMMERCIAL to DC Wednesday night and is expected to speak at CPAC at 12:30 Thursday.

  3. Jace Walden says:

    Chris Farris,

    It all depends on what you mean by “Free” Market. If by “Free”, Senator Johnson means, “Free to introduce your money into the market under pain of punishment”, then it is indeed “Free”.

    But if he means, “Free to do with you money as you see fit without threat of government interference” then no, RomneyCare isn’t remotely “Free Market”

  4. Bull Moose says:

    I think it is rather funny that you folks think Romney is a conservative and thus justify your support for him in that we have to elect a conservative.

    He clearly is not. He raised taxes in MA. That’s not conservative.

    He can’t run his campaign without him and his surrogates attacking the character and record of John McCain. That’s weak.

    Romney is the path to the end of the GOP and the defeat of many Republican office holders.

    McCain ACTUALLY stands for what it means to be a Republican and a Conservative – lower taxers, reduced federal spending, and ethics in government. We have to reclaim our party from the special interests who would ruin it with pork barrel earmarks, supporting corrupt politicians, and so forth.

    McCain is the only candidate who can unite all of America and win in November 2008.

  5. Doug Deal says:

    Bull, a few minor correctrions…

    McCain ACTUALLY stands for what it means to be a Republican RINO and a Conservative moderate – lower taxers the same taxes, and reduced federal spending first amendment freedoms, and ethics in government.

    We have to reclaim our party from the special interests who would ruin it with pork barrel earmarks closed borders, supporting opposing corrupt politicians (like Kenedy and Clinton), and so forth.

  6. IndyInjun says:

    Bull Moose:

    I get your point and it is a valid one. I used to like McCain and he is more fiscally responsible than the rest.

    I will grant that McCain is fiscally responsible, excepting the Iraq war borrowing but trying to call Isakson and Chambliss so is more than I can stomach.

    I won’t vote for McCain, for a far greater fiscal conservative is in this race and he has the same chance of being POTUS.

  7. debbie0040 says:

    Herman Cain gave a rousing introduction of Romney.

    D.A King with Dustin Inman Society was interviewed and gave his thoughts on McCain and amnesty.

    Illegal imgration was a main issue for me and that is why I chose Romney. Romney has a good record opposing illegal immigration. McCain and Huckabee do not.

    The ecomony is also an issue with me. I want someone that has had experience in the private sector so they know what it takes to turn the economy around.

    The anti illegal immigration crowd will never support McCain. They are looking at Lou Dobbs to run as an independant if McCain is the nominee…

  8. waterboy says:

    Bull –
    You wrote “He can’t run his campaign without him and his surrogates attacking the character and record of John McCain.” I’ve never heard Romney go after McCain’s character – just his liberal way of thinking regarding immigration, tax cuts, anti-economy green thinking and campaign finance reform. Did I miss something?

    Huge crowd at Romney event today…imagine what it would have looked like on a weedend afternoon! The folks there actually had to take off from work or skip classes to go. It was incredible!

  9. waterboy says:

    Chris –
    In response to your question about Romney support, if his economic experience, Olympic leadership, and financial turnaround as Gov. of Massachusetts and his strong moral and family qualities are not enough, I read a comment that his wife made stating that Mitt makes really great mashed potatoes!

    I love some good mashed taters!

  10. Rick Day says:

    Some Mormons Mitters stole a couple of my Ron Paul Yard signs in front of my business today.

    I’ll be reviewing video surveillance cams from Midtown Alliance on who the culprits are.

    Meantime I went down the street to the Mitter MSM Caravan of Dreams ™ and handed out Ron Paul lit to the news crews and folks with earphones on their tongues.

    Kind of like a reverse-Mormon thing, eh?

    One Fox guy was, er, bitter. “Save the paper” waiving off my offer.

    “I’d rather save the country.”

    *cue news crews snickering*

  11. debbie0040 says:

    The fact Herman Cain endorsed Romney should pursuade undecideds to vote for Mitt.

    Next to Romney, Herman Cain received the biggest applause. The place erupted when he introduced Romney. When Romney took stage, it was wild and the place erupted again in frenzied applause. People were really excited about Romney…

    It was well worth missing lunch for…

  12. GOPeach says:

    And I am having to clear Ron Paul signs off my yard. I own quite a large lot near the Vinings Library and the signs are being picked up by the County and trashed… Seems Ron Paul fans need to read the local Sign Code AND the US Constitution!

    All REVOLUTIONS are LOCAL!

  13. debbie0040 says:

    Peach, if you had been there, Herman would have changed your mind .

    Herman said it is all about conservative leadership….

    God, Herman needs to run for office again…He would get elected in a landslide. The crowd just went crazy when Cain was introduced…

    I would venture at this point that if the State GOP Convention were held in the next few weeks, Saxby would be booed again and Herman Cain would get the best reaction in applause.

  14. GOPeach says:

    If only Herman Cain knew what MITT FLOP REALLY thinks about “NEGROS”

    Shhhhhhh Don’t tell him.

    It was once a very common belief among Mormons that black people were descended from Cain; that Cain and his descendants were cursed for that act of Cain killing Abel; and the mark of that curse was a black skin; and that the seed of Cain survived the flood through Ham, one of the sons of Noah. And this, it was thought, was why black men were not ordained to the priesthood. Joseph Fielding Smith (who later became 10th president of the church) wrote in Answers to Gospel Questions, “‘Was Cain cursed with a black skin?’ Technically the black skin was not the curse, but the mark of the curse. The scriptures do not say that Cain was made black, but we read that his descendants were. We may well suppose that Cain was also black and that this was the mark the Lord placed upon him” (p. 175). There are Mormons who still believe this, though they wouldn’t say so. During my two years of LDS missionary work I met several Elders who totally believed it.

  15. GOPeach says:

    I guess Mitt Flop did not tell Herman that he owned Domino’s Pizza … Godfather’s Pizza competitor.

    Shhhhhhhhhh Don’t tell Herman.

  16. waterboy says:

    Peach –
    I don’t go to that church. Thanks for asking. I too have noticed the lack of respect Ron Paul junkies have for private property and ROW postings. They seem to really like having signs posted illegally on the interstate. Real class acts.

    Debbie –
    Glad you could attend and yes, Cain did have a huge roar when he spoke of Romney. I thanked him for his article in the AJC – it was very well done.

    I wonder why PP doesn’t have a front page post regarding Romney’s HUGE win in Maine this weekend?

  17. Icarus says:

    “I wonder why PP doesn’t have a front page post regarding Romney’s HUGE win in Maine this weekend?”

    Dude, we can’t cover everything, and we just gave over 1,000 comments to a Mitt Romney quote. We’re doing the best we can around here.

  18. waterboy says:

    Well it didn’t stop postes regarding FL, SC, etc. Last time I checked this was a national election. so that’s WTF.

    Plus, McCain’s sorry butt has stooped to making BS robo calls that are strictly anti-Romney. McCain has always been a piece of crap, but now we are learning just how much he stinks!

  19. CHelf says:

    Waterboy,

    I know you’re repeating the line Mitt gives you but MA was not ‘turned around’. Stats from Club For Growth, FDIC, Bureau of Labor Statistics, etc. all show jobs left MA, manuafacturing jobs declined, unemployment was stagnant, housing prices dropped, housing starts declined, etc. etc. etc. If anything, the rates of ‘growth’ in MA were the third worst in the country at that time. Added to the fact fees and taxes WERE raised and the number of government employees increased, I and the facts do not see any conservative achievements made by him as governor. You can give me the line about the fees are voluntary and were ‘due’ for a hike, but that is NOT a conservative idea. Last I checked, conservatism did not advocate periodic hikes to match inflation, COLA, etc. You can argue the point all you want. But between his moderate record as governor and his recent change on gay rights, abortion, guns, Bush tax cuts, joining the NRA in 2006, Brady Bill, etc. he just does not have any record as a conservative to run on. Again, wonderful if his conversion is sincere. But this is no time for the rookie with no conservative experience to be placed in charge of the party and nation. He can jump back to MI or UT and run for Senate, Governor, etc. and make us proud but as far as leading the nation, we cannot take that chance.

  20. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Debbie, you said:

    “Romney has a good record opposing illegal immigration. ”

    Please explain. And make it better than “he signed an agreement 3 weeks before leaving office that allowed the MA state police to coordinate efforts with the federal government.” Because we all see that for what it is–an 11th hour effort to improve his stock in a GOP primary.

    So, what, other than the aforementioned blatantly political (and ineffective) move, has Mitt done to combat illegal immigration? All I know of is his campaign trail pronouncements, which mean nothing.

    I do know this: Brewster, Brookline, Cambridge, Lexington, Orleans, and Somerville, Massachusetts operated as sanctuary cities during Governor Romney’s tenure. He let these six sanctuary cities openly flout federal immigration laws.

    Romney could have pressured or sued these cities to become non-sanctuaries. He also could have slashed their allowances. Instead, as local officials mocked federal immigration authorities, state tax dollars cascaded into their operating budgets.

    Please. I beg of you. Refute.

  21. waterboy says:

    Chelp –
    Screw you. your constant whining about what you think Mitt did and what he really did are of very little importance to me. Vote for Huck if you want…it’s a waste of time. Vote for McCain if you want…it’s a vote for open borders, tree huggin regulations and a great example of piss poor leadership for over 20 years.

    I’ll take the business experience, volunteer leadership and record of success every time. I’m voting for Mitt Romney for President.

    Charge on brother!

  22. waterboy says:

    How about because he wanted to run for President. Unlike the useless US Senate, you can’t govern AND run for president. McCain, Obama & Clinton all seem to think they can do their usual pathetic jobs while running around the country campaigning.

  23. I Am Jacks Post says:

    “Unlike the useless US Senate, you can’t govern AND run for president.”

    Maybe not, but give Mitt credit for trying.

    Massachusetts records show that in 2006, Mitt’s last year as governor, he spent all or part of 212 days outside of Massachusetts, an average of more than four days on the road each week.

    I bet he was probably on the road out of a bunch of “small varmint” hunting trips.

  24. Ms_midtown says:

    That’s a lazy politician, and likely the reason Romney lost New Hampshire.
    Ronald Reagan Jimmy Carter served two terms, George Bush ran for president as an elected governor, his dad was elected to congress twice.

    Mitt Romney has never been re-elected, to anything.

  25. CHelf says:

    His whole term was to set himself up to run for President. His whole purpose those 4 years was to attempt to redefine himself. Consider it Extreme Makeover: Mitt Edition. He changed all of his positions and did things like join the NRA in 2006 to build up his credentials. It was a checklist of things every conservative must do before running for office. His problem was that it all occurred right before announcing his run for President. Problem is that he has a history of left leaning policies and statements. Saying he was an independent during Reagan-Bush, trying to out-liberal Ted Kennedy in his run for Senate, opposing Bush tax cuts (yes folks MITT opposed them but yet McCain is the bad one), and even endorsing just 5 years ago a man who is as fringe left as they come for re-election as mayor of Salt Lake City. Endorsing Rocky Anderson really gets me. This guy goes on Hannity and on O’Reilly demanding Bush be impeached for Iraq and marches with Cindy Sheehan but it’s this type that Mitt calls a team builder and worth endorsing for office. No matter how you look at Mitt, he just has no established credentials to be called a conservative. There’s no issue with him wanting to run for the GOP nomination. But don’t make claims that he is the true conservative in this race.

  26. waterboy says:

    Jacky boy –
    Didn’t McCain win NH when he ran last time??? I think they called him the “President of NH”…sound familiar? How did that work out for him?
    Also, McCain got 37% and Romney got 32% in NH. Pretty good for the new dude.

    OH, my bad, this isn’t the NH Pundit…it’s the Peach Pundit. WTF.

    In case you missed it, Romney is now 5 delegates behind McCain.

  27. shep1975 says:

    and since Romney spent half of the job he was elected by the people of Massachusetts to do running for his next job, doesn’t he owe them back a year of pay and rent for the Gov’s Mansion? Can we expect that the 3rd and 4th year of the Romney Presidency will be dedicate to running for “President of the World?”

    (just trying to lighten things up a bit folks!)

  28. Ms_midtown says:

    If Romney had been re-elected, he would be in a much better position for a second try in 2012.
    John Edwards sat idle for 4 years. Even Hillary is on her 2nd term.

    Very difficult to become President on only 1 term as anything. Unless you’re General Eisenhower.

  29. debbie0040 says:

    I hope my Georgia alumni hubby does not read this but… You Georgia fans seem to make fun of GT every chance you get. If I am not mistaken, they were the last college team in Georgia to win a National Championship..

    IamJack, Romney has a better record on illegal immigration that McCain and The Huckster.

    http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez2008.html

    DRIVER’S LICENCES: Governor Romney Opposed Efforts To Give Driver’s Licenses To Illegal Immigrants. “‘Those who are here illegally should not receive tacit support from our government that gives an indication of legitimacy,’ the governor said, echoing arguments that opponents have voiced in the Commonwealth and in other states considering similar license measures. ‘If they are here illegally, they should not get driver’s licenses,’ he said.” (Scott S. Greenberger, “Romney Stand Dims Chances Of License For Undocumented,” The Boston Globe, 10/28/03)

    IN-STATE TUITION: Governor Romney Vetoed In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants. “Romney also vetoed a number of outside sections of the budget, including:…A plan that would have permitted illegal aliens to pay the same in-state tuition rate at our public colleges and universities as Massachusetts citizens.” (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Signs $22.402B Fiscal Year 2005 ‘No New Tax’ Budget,” Press Release, 6/25/04)

    – Governor Romney: “The point is pretty clear, which is are we going to have an incentive that taxpayers pay for individuals to come into our schools and get a break on tuition, or are we not? And in my view we follow the law. And if you believe we should change the law, then do that. But don’t say that we have a law and then don’t follow it.” (Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes, 11/2/05)

    ENGLISH IMMERSION: Governor Romney Fought Efforts To Weaken Massachusetts’ English Immersion Law. “But yesterday, Romney press secretary Shawn Feddeman said the governor will fight all attempts to slow the implementation of English immersion, known on the ballot as Question 2. … ‘He will veto anything that weakens or delays English immersion,’ Feddeman said.” (Anand Vaishnav, “Romney Firm On English Timetable,” The Boston Globe, 1/24/03)

    – In June 2002, Mitt Romney Said “The Approach Of English Immersion Is One That I Support. … I Would Make English Immersion The Educational Norm For All Non-Native English Speakers.” (John McElhenny, “Mitt Romney Endorses ‘English Immersion’ Education Plan,” The Associated Press, 6/4/02)

    ENFORCEMENT: In December 2006, Governor Romney Signed A Memorandum Of Agreement With The Federal Government To Allow State Law Enforcement To Enforce Federal Immigration Laws. “Governor Mitt Romney and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Secretary Julie L. Myers today announced the signing of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and ICE, which will give specially trained Massachusetts State Troopers the authority to administer and enforce federal immigration laws in the Commonwealth.” (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Governor Romney, ICE Sign Immigration Enforcement Pact,” Press Release, 12/13/06)

    – Governor Romney: “The scope of our nation’s illegal immigration problem requires us to pursue and implement new solutions wherever possible. … State troopers are highly trained professionals who are prepared to assist the federal government in apprehending immigration violators without disrupting their normal law enforcement routines.” (Jonathan Saltzman, “Romney OK’s Pact So Troopers Can Arrest Illegal Immigrants,” The Boston Globe, 12/14/06)

    – In June 2006, Governor Romney Announced That He Would Seek A 287G Agreement With The Federal Government. “Days after Attorney General Tom Reilly reaffirmed his promise not to hunt down companies that hire illegal immigrants, Gov. Mitt Romney has decided to take matters into his own hands. Romney, who is considering a run for president in 2008, has asked his legal counsel to explore the possibility of entering into an agreement with the federal government that would authorize state troopers to arrest illegal immigrants, said spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom yesterday. ” (Rebecca Fater, “Romney: State Troopers Should Have Power To Arrest Illegal Immigrants,” Lowell Sun, 6/22/06)

  30. debbie0040 says:

    Peach, Huckabee lied about his flip flops, Romney did not.

    Huckabee told an outright lie when he said he did not support the Amnesty bill last year. His own words convict him. RE: Washington Post interview May 23, 2006

    Huckabee has a bad record on fiscal policy, pardons and commutations, illegal immigration, etc…

  31. shep1975 says:

    UGA has won a lot of National Championships in the last few years. As Tech fans completely understand by the fact they do not have a football team, there are more sports than just football.

  32. debbie0040 says:

    Chelf, who do you think is the true conservative in this race? It sure ain’t the Huckster or McCain…

  33. CHelf says:

    I’m not saying anyone is. You are though. I am merely pointing out Mitt’s record and his recent speeches are completely contradictory. And yes Mitt DID lie about his flip flop. He DID oppose the Bush tax cuts. He even earned the praise of Barney Frank for his opposition. But he told Huckabee in response to a question he ALWAYS supported the Bush tax cuts. He has attacked McCain for doing something he himself has done. AND he has denied ever opposing them. That is two, count two, hits just on one issue. I will say McCain has far more conservative credentials than Mitt does. While Mitt was claiming he was an independent and wanted nothing to do with Reagan-Bush, McCain was supporting Robert Bork in his confirmation process. When exactly did Mitt convert to this conservative cause? No one can seem to pinpoint his ‘birth day’.

    In response to the in-state tuition ‘veto’, let’s look a little closer at the reason and Mitt’s comments that sound awfully close in words to Huckabee: In 2004, the Boston Globe reported that Romney was reluctant to veto the tuition proposal–and not at all the certain, sure-footed decision maker portrayed in the ad. At the time, Romney said, “I hate the idea of in any way making it more difficult for kids, even those who are illegal aliens, to afford college in our state.”

    That does sound similar to Huckabee’s words. Odd that he would take the same line as Huckabee but then attack Huckabee for this. Here is some more background on Mitt’s record – some good and some bad. But all in all shows inconsistency and a lean to the Right conveniently right before running for President:

    http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Mitt_Romney_Immigration.htm

  34. debbie0040 says:

    Did Romney tell a flat out lie about not supporting the amnesty bill last year like Huckabee did? Did Romney call a bill that would require proof of citizenship in order to register to vote un American and un Christian? There is a reason many GOP activists in Arkansas oppose the Huckster. Did Romney pardon and commute the sentence of more than the governors of six states combined?

    You want to compare Romney versus Huckabee, then bring it on… I will provide you links. You are the one that started comparing Huckabee and Romney…

    Please provide the link to that Boston Globe article you reference.

    Let’s see what anti illegal immigrations groups think of Romney, McCain and Huckabee.

    Friends of ALIPAC,

    Standard reminder that ALIPAC is not endorsing any Presidential candidate and our focus is on warning the public about the pro-amnesty candidates, who are all of the Democrats and GOP candidates McCain and Huckabee.

    We have to put that text into every email because we get so many false accusations that we are supporting this candidate or that.

    While both Mitt Romney and Ron Paul remain on our No Amnesty list at ALIPAC, we are quite aware that voters in America who support anti-Amnesty Ron Paul and Secret-Amnesty Mike Huckabee are looking at the Mitt Romney campaign this weekend because they fear what DC insider John McCain will do to this nation.

    We ask our supporters who favor Ron Paul to realize that ALIPAC did not create this situation, we are merely describing what we are seeing out there.

    At the time of this e-mail alert, many of our activists across America are working feverishly to get our “McClintObama Amnesty” article out to the nation. Since this article warns voters about both McCain and Huckster, both Paul and Romney are beneficiaries of our efforts.

    There are many accusations that Mitt Romney will support Amnesty like the others. What we do know is that Mitt Romney has been one of the most fervent candidates stating opposition to Amnesty. So much so, it is now confirmed that the Bush administration is working against Mitt Romney behind the scenes and specifically in response to Romney’s tough stance on immigration.

    Article: Bush opposes Romney
    http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-101590.html

  35. debbie0040 says:

    Chelf, the GOP activists in Arizona don’t even like John McCain . They said his Straight Talk Express should be renamed Forked Tongue Express..

    The bottom line is Romney has a better record on illegal immigration than either Huckabee or McCain. That is my number one issue…

    I will support McCain if he is the nominee but I believe Romney is more in line with my beliefs…

    http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/ann_coulter/2008/02/04/69907.html?s=al&promo_code=4464-1

  36. Doug Deal says:

    It would be nice if the server didn’t allow someone to post the very next reply in a thread, and maybe limit the post to one screen-full of text.

    Nothing is more fun, in all the world, than scrolling 6-7 pages to get halfway through one of Debbie’s cut-n-paste jobs, only to give up thinking the end will never come.

  37. Philly says:

    You people need to understand that McCain is a conservative. He is pro life, believes in appointing orginalist judges to the Supreme Court, etc. He strayed on illegal immigration but has proven he will listen to the voters on this issue.

    Ronald Reagan is dead. There will never be another President like him.

    The GOP has an uphill battle to retain the Whitehouse. With McCain, we stand a good chance.

    Isn’t President McCain better than President Clinton/Obama?

  38. Philly says:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120209536777639949.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries

    McCain and the Supreme Court
    By STEVEN G. CALABRESI and JOHN O. MCGINNIS
    February 4, 2008; Page A14

    The conservative movement has made enormous gains over the past three decades in restoring constitutional government. The Roberts Supreme Court shows every sign of building on these gains.

    Yet the gulf between Democratic and Republican approaches to constitutional law and the role of the federal courts is greater than at any time since the New Deal. With a Democratic Senate, Democratic presidents would be able to confirm adherents of the theory of the “Living Constitution” — in essence empowering judges to update the Constitution to advance their own conception of a better world. This would threaten the jurisprudential gains of the past three decades, and provide new impetus to judicial activism of a kind not seen since the 1960s.

    We believe that the nomination of John McCain is the best option to preserve the ongoing restoration of constitutional government. He is by far the most electable Republican candidate remaining in the race, and based on his record is as likely to appoint judges committed to constitutionalism as Mitt Romney, a candidate for whom we also have great respect.

    We make no apology for suggesting that electability must be a prime consideration. The expected value of any presidential candidate for the future of the American judiciary must be discounted by the probability that the candidate will not prevail in the election. For other kinds of issues, it may be argued that it is better to lose with the perfect candidate than to win with an imperfect one. The party lives to fight another day and can reverse the bad policies of an intervening presidency.

    The judiciary is different. On Jan. 20, 2009, six of the nine Supreme Court justices will be over 70. Most of them could be replaced by the next president, particularly if he or she is re-elected. Given the prospect of accelerating gains in modern medical technology, some of the new justices may serve for half a century. Even if a more perfect candidate were somehow elected in 2012, he would not be able to undo the damage, especially to the Supreme Court.

    Accordingly, for judicial conservatives electability must be a paramount consideration. By all accounts, Mr. McCain is more electable than Mr. Romney. He runs ahead or even with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in the national polls, and actually leads the Democratic candidates in key swing states like Wisconsin. Mr. Romney trails well behind both Democratic candidates by double digits. The fundamental dynamic of this race points in Mr. McCain’s way as well. He appeals to independents, while Mr. Romney’s support is largely confined to Republicans.

    With many more Republican senators up for re-election than Democrats, the nomination of Mr. Romney could easily lead to a Goldwater-like debacle, in which the GOP loses not only the White House but also its ability in practice to filibuster in the Senate. Thus, even if we believed that Mr. Romney’s judicial appointments were likely to be better than Mr. McCain’s — and we are not persuaded of that — we would find ourselves hard-pressed to support his candidacy, given that he is so much less likely to make any appointments at all.

    In fact, there is no reason to believe that Mr. McCain will not make excellent appointments to the court. On judicial nominations, he has voted soundly in the past from Robert Bork in 1987 to Samuel Alito in 2006. His pro-life record also provides a surety that he will not appoint judicial activists.

    We recognize that there are two plausible sources of disquiet. Mr. McCain is perhaps the foremost champion of campaign-finance regulation, regulation that is hard to square with the First Amendment. Still, a President McCain would inevitably have a broader focus. Securing the party’s base of judicial conservatives is a necessary formula for governance, as President Bush himself showed when he swiftly dropped the ill-conceived nomination of Harriet Miers.

    Perhaps more important, because of the success of constitutionalist jurisprudence, a McCain administration would be enveloped by conservative thinking in this area. The strand of jurisprudential thought that produced Sen. Warren Rudman and Justice David Souter is no longer vibrant in the Republican Party.

    Others are concerned that Mr. McCain was a member of the “Gang of 14,” opposing the attempt to end filibusters of judicial nominations. We believe that Mr. McCain’s views about the institutional dynamics of the Senate are a poor guide to his performance as president. In any event, the agreement of the Gang of 14 had its costs, but it played an important role in ensuring that Samuel Alito faced no Senate filibuster. It also led to the confirmation of Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and Bill Pryor, three of President George W. Bush’s best judicial appointees to the lower federal courts.

    Conservative complaints about Mr. McCain’s role as a member of the Gang of 14 seem to encapsulate all that is wrong in general with conservative carping over his candidacy. It makes the perfect the enemy of the very good results that have been achieved, thanks in no small part to Mr. McCain, and to the very likely prospect of further good results that might come from his election as president.

  39. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Philly, you and I were bound to agree on something sooner or later. I’m glad it’s on which Republican is best able to beat the Democrats come November.

  40. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Debbie,

    You say GOP activists in Arizona don’t like McCain. And yet the efforts of this, ahem, sizable group of activists aside, John McCain has never lost an election since the day he was first elected to office.

  41. CHelf says:

    Debbie says Romney is more in line with her beliefs. As someone pointed out earlier, seeing Debbie’s constant movement of support to various candidates almost as if a fad, I can believe her as being accurate in her statement. Her and Mitt do have a little in common.

  42. CHelf says:

    I Am Jacks Post – It’s like activists and Republicans in GA would never elect Casey Cagle as well. How are those steak dinners coming Debbie? Are we talking about a select few or every Republican out there?

  43. debbie0040 says:

    Chelf, it should read She and Mitt not Her and Mitt. Gee, you and Peach sure post alike. Are you the rich husband she talks about? You know she said she had a rich husband but did not say whose rich husband she had…

    Romney is more in line with my beliefs than either Phuckabee or McCain. Again, my number one issue is immigration… I did like Rudy because of his electibility but in the end decided he was too liberal and went with Romney.

    I was wrong about Cagle. Chelf, go to local GOP meetings and see the reaction from long time activists. Just look at the reaction of activists to Chambliss and Isakson endorsing McCain.. I am not mistaken on that…

    Chelf, when will you admit you were mistaken about Phuckabee being the great savior of the GOP and about him being the next President?

  44. debbie0040 says:

    I am jack, GOP activists are not the only ones that vote. Now that you mention it, McCain only leads by 9% over Romney in Arizona. He can not be that popular not to have a greater lead among GOP voters… Even Huckabee has a greater lead than that in Arkansas…

  45. debbie0040 says:

    If McCain is the nominee, I will support him. I don’t think of him being the great evil one that a lot of activists do. I reserve that distinction to Billary Obama

  46. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Look, we can settle this right now. Someone find out who Sadie Fields and her 12 followers, er, supporters are backing and THAT’S the person who’ll win. Mark it down.

  47. CHelf says:

    Debbie,

    Sorry but one mistake while under the influence of painkillers following surgery does not give you justification for name calling. I know name-calling is your natural lashing out response when backed in a corner. But you still have nothing to back up any of your claims about Mitt. And “Phuckabee”? Sounds more like a fantasy pet name of yours than the intended insult. I am not sure what meds are your excuse but I never have said ANYTHING about Huckabee being the great savior of the GOP OR him being the next President. I know my memory is hazy now but you’ve resorted to flat out creative storytelling. Again, as much as Mitt has changed positions, I see why you like him. Again, if his conversion is legit, then good for him seeing the light. I just don’t trust a rookie looking at on the job training with national security issues and other major issues facing the nation. Let him verify (remember “trust but verify”?) himself by running for Senate. If he truly cares, let him run in those other seats so that we can see he is what he claims. I don’t take one term of crafting an image for immediately running for President as long enough to have proven himself.

  48. Icarus says:

    “But on Monday she (Sadie Fields) said that she found McCain to be unacceptable because of his sponsorship of compromise bills on immigration and the environment, and because of his backing of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill — which Fields described as an attack on free speech.”

    Because, you know, Jesus hated the environment, foreigners, and soft money.

  49. I Am Jacks Post says:

    By the way, it’s worth noting the state caucus and primary contests Mitt has won thus far.

    Please, no snickering. These are all serious electoral battles and prove Mitt would be a formidable candidate come this November.

    So, without further ado, here’s where Mitt has triumphed:

    Nevada
    Michigan
    Maine
    Wyoming

    I’m sure I’ve forgotten something. Like American Somoa, or Guam.

  50. Romegaguy says:

    It sure helped out Ralph Reed Jack… but then again Ralph also had the support of GOPeach and Debbie…

  51. Icarus says:

    “Does the Garden of Eden have a caucus?”

    It did, until Sadie Fields got caught giving away apples within 150 feet of the polls.

  52. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Casey Cagle just emailed me and told me that McCain should dare Hannity into coming to town and doing two fundraisers for Mitt.

  53. Alex says:

    These are my reasons for supporting Mitt Romney:

    http://tinyurl.com/2sewg7

    My comments there *do* say why I don’t support McCain or Huckabee (and I know this post requested someone to articulate why they support Romney without referencing McCain), however, my comments *also* give various positive reasons to support Romney.

    I hope you’ll pardon me for also posting this link at the most recent entry here.

  54. Brian Laurens says:

    Jason, this is the only name I post under. Ask the admins if you must. Waterboy has attacked me before. I am not him. He does happen to be right about Romney though.

  55. GOPeach says:

    HERMAN CAIN GAVE HUCKABEE A CHECK FOR $2,300.!!!!! Ask JOE DENDY – Huckabee State Co-Chair……

    I WOULD CALL THAT AN ENDORSEMENT!!!!

    He gave Romney NO MONEY . He only spoke and the AJC betrayed Herman Cain … putting words in his mouth……..

    I KNEW HERMAN CAIN supported HUCKABEE!!!!!!!

  56. GOPeach says:

    Brian Laurens – THAT IS NOT TRUE …. you post under ” Brian from Ellijay”

    You have been hanging out with MITT too much…
    little white fibs…..

  57. ConservativeCaucus says:

    Debbie,

    Repeating your distortion about Huckabee’s stance of last year’s immigration bill doesn’t make it true. And he most definitely didn’t lie about it.

    It stuns me that you can look at Romney and see a conservative. I understand your concerns about Huckabee and his record. But you seemingly think that he is the 2nd coming of Ronald Reagan… that is totally perplexing. McCain is closer to Reagan than Romney and McCain isn’t that close.

  58. GOPeach says:

    I have made the decision to vote for Governor Mike Huckabee on the basis of research into actual records — rather than empty campaign double-talk. Alone among the frontrunners, his record is conservative on the most fundamental issues. I will go even further: examining records proves that when $100 million dollars of GOP campaign propaganda is set aside, Mike Huckabee is the only real across-the-board (social and fiscal) conservative among the three front runners.

    Mitt Romney is not only not a conservative on any issue, he’s not even on the left-right spectrum. He has no beliefs. No principles. No backbone. No soul. He is a soulless creature who will do and say anything to get elected.

    McCain is somewhere in the middle. He has disappointed me, and many other conservatives, many times (McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy chief among them). If he becomes the GOP nominee I will support him.

    I will not under any circumstances vote for Mitt Romney. Ever.

    Here is why I support Mike Huckabee:

    Abortion: First and foremost, I am voting for Huckabee because he is the only leading candidate who supports the core of the GOP plank – the Human Life Amendment. Mitt Romney openly opposes it. McCain has voted “pro-life” but voting is as far as he will go. He recoils from paying any price politically or personally to end the holocaust happening daily around the corner from your house. When pro-life conservatives were trying to replace career pro-abort Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court, McCain called Justice Samuel Alito “too conservative.”

    We will never be safe and secure from either foreign or domestic enemies until we stop the barbaric, inhumane practice of abortion which has liquidated almost 50 million babies since Roe v Wade. I agree with those who examine providential events in American history and conclude that God has protected this nation at crucial times. If you are even open to that possibility, wouldn’t you have to agree that 50 million seems like a lot of babies to kill and still hope God will protect America? Isn’t that hypocritical of us? Outlawing abortion at the federal level is not a secondary issue. It’s Issue Numero Uno. It’s a no-brainer. Mike Huckabee deserves every vote in America for understanding that alone.

    Senator McCain is not in favor of amending our constitution to ensure that, regardless of what state a baby is born into, he or she is guaranteed the legal right to life. How puzzling to claim to believe in the inalienable right to life and liberty yet assert that “federalism” or “states’ rights” somehow grant states a power to take innocent life. In 1860 that position was not the abolitionist position. It was the pro-slavery position. Today it is neither constitutional nor conservative. It’s just theoretically halfway between good and evil. And it won’t end the harvest of death and take the blood off our hands.

    Mitt Romney is the Founding Father of government-subsidized, $50 abortion-on-demand in Massachusetts. Laws don’t get any more pro-abortion than Mitt Romney’s Orwellian health care plan…unless you go to Communist China. Even the Communist Democrats in Boston couldn’t pull that off. He is not merely “weak” or unconvincing on this issue. He’s an amoral pro-abort masquerading as a convert to the view that human life is sacred. Other than that he’s indistinguishable from Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton (both of whom have gleefully endorsed the Romney-Kennedy-Planned Parenthood healthcare plan). Enough said? He claims he was required by law to sign this healthcare bill that established abortion with a $50 co-pay as a “healthcare benefit.” That is an insult to our intelligence and a pre-meditated lie. There is no Massachusetts’ law that requires subsidized abortion on demand. Romney also appointed a Planned Parenthood member to his healthcare advisory board and no pro-life member. Pro-life governors don’t do that. This alone puts him on the pro-abortion extreme of the spectrum — for Democrats, let alone Republicans.

    Marriage: Unlike McCain who worked hard to defeat a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), Huckabee strongly supports a FMA and understands what is at stake for America, our children and grandchildren if we fail to enshrine into law that marriage is between one man and one woman. Although Governor Romney has recently staked out a position claiming to support traditional marriage, he speaks as the opportunistic politician who unilaterally imposed “same sex marriage” in Massachusetts after the law-making body that has exclusive authority to do so, refused to grant the Goodridge judges their fantasy. He did this revolutionary act — unbidden by even the judges — claiming he was just “following the law.” A lie, pure and simple, powerfully refuted by the state Constitution itself.

    As many constitutional experts have tried in vain to warn the conservative elites, there is no law that allows “same sex marriage” in Massachusetts. It’s still illegal. The court merely issued a surreal and legally impotent declaratory opinion that barring same sex marriage was unconstitutional. Romney even opposed efforts to remove the judges who violated their oaths of office by ignoring the state constitution’s removal of court jurisdiction to even hear such a case. In September of 2007 we finally learned the explanation for Romney’s mysterious actions: he was carrying out a 2002 campaign promise to the homosexual “Log Cabin” Republicans.

    Immigration: Although Governor Huckabee has been called the “amnesty” candidate, he has never supported “amnesty.” He is in favor of securing the border and has taken the “No Amnesty Pledge.” He has received the endorsements from Congressman Duncan Hunter and Jim Gilchrist founder of the Minuteman Project. Senator McCain was the co-author of the McCain-Kennedy-Bush “comprehensive immigration” bill that was ultimately defeated. But he now supports securing the border first. Governor Romney supported McCain-Kennedy-Bush as well and now, like McCain, claims to support securing the border first. Neither has that much credibility with me when it comes to this issue. Although I tend to trust McCain more given “Multiple Choice Mitt’s” penchant for surreal flip flops.

    Foreign Policy/National Security: Governor Huckabee has the most executive experience of any candidate in either party – three or four times what Mitt Romney has, considering Romney spent so much time outside his state (212 days in his last year in office).

    With nearly eleven years running a state, Governor Huckabee is by far the best qualified to manage a huge, bloated bureaucracy. He supports increasing defense expenditures from our current 3.9% of GDP level to the Reagan Era 6% of GDP level and the “Powell Doctrine” of using overwhelming force. Senator McCain lacks the executive experience but does have the actual military and government experience and is no doubt well qualified to lead the War on Islamic Jihadism. By supporting the surge even when it was not politically popular, McCain showed that he is willing to do the right thing regardless of the polls. Governor Romney is the least qualified of the three. Romney’s chief counterterrorism expert Cofer Black was condemned by the 9-11 Commission, Congressional Joint Inquiry, and the CIA Inspector General for his mismanagement of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center as contributing factors in the 9-11 attacks. This should be a major concern for voters.

    2nd Amendment: Huckabee has always been a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment. McCain has more of a mixed record on gun control laws. Romney is by far the most pro-gun control anti-2nd Amendment candidate. He has always supported the Brady Bill and the so called “Assault Weapons Ban” both of which are opposed by the NRA. As governor he boasted about having signed into law some of the strictest gun control laws in the country.

    Taxes and Spending: Huckabee is, by far, the most fiscally conservative of the three. As governor he cut taxes almost 100 times and left Arkansas with an $850 million surplus. While I have some questions about his proposed” Fair Tax” which is a flat consumption based tax that would replace our federal income tax, it is by far the most aggressive fiscal proposal put forth by any candidate. While Senator McCain did oppose the Bush Tax Cuts (b/c they didn’t include enough spending cuts), he now supports making them permanent. And nobody doubts his anti-pork spending bona fides. Romney, as governor, raised taxes by over $500 million dollars. (He called them fees) leaving the Commonwealth in financial turmoil. His government run socialist healthcare plan he claimed as his signature achievement has been exposed as a catastrophe in the making. And although he derides McCain for not supporting the Bush Tax Cuts, Romney himself didn’t support them either.

    Special Rights for Homosexuals: Huckabee has always been opposed to same-sex “marriage” and any special rights based on sexual orientation. McCain has more of a mixed record as the lone GOP senator to oppose a federal marriage amendment. Romney boosted funding for pro-homosexuality indoctrination in schools, pushed gay adoption, falsely pretending that a law forced him to, and has been the more aggressive in catering to the homosexual militants than most liberal Democrats. He argued in 1994 that he could get more accomplished for the gay agenda than Ted Kennedy and made similar promises when running for governor in 2002. He called a 2002 Massachusetts protection of marriage amendment “too extreme” and is solely responsible for illegally instituting “same sex marriage” in the Cradle of Democracy. He also supports homosexual Boy Scout leaders and homosexuals serving openly in the military.

  59. debbie0040 says:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-arizona4feb04,0,879689.story

    McCain has fences to mend in home state
    template_bas
    template_bas
    Some Republicans don’t like the senator’s moderate record on illegal immigration.
    By Ralph Vartabedian and Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
    February 4, 2008
    PHOENIX — — Sen. John McCain’s run for the presidency is gaining momentum across the nation, but the campaign is meeting disapproval in one of the most unlikely places: his home turf in Arizona.

    In a straw poll vote two weeks ago of 721 Republican leaders in Maricopa County, the major population center of the state, a majority ranked McCain as the least acceptable Republican candidate for president.

  60. Jace Walden says:

    TO CLEAR THE RECORD ON BRIAN LAURENS:

    (1) He is not Waterboy. If he was Waterboy, I could neither confirm or deny it. But since I know for a fact that he isn’t Waterboy, I have no problem clearing the record.

    (2) I don’t think he’s posted under the name “Brian from Ellijay” in quite some time, Peach. “Brian Laurens” is the only name he currently posts under.

Comments are closed.