Why to Reject McCain

Senator John McCain is clearly the front runner for the Republican nod to go up against the Democratic nominee and polls show he has the best chance to beat either of the two remaining on their ticket. Of course, no polls show how McCain would match up against them if they decided to run as a team. McCain came back from near death to take the lead and this was, in part, because of the boost he received from the media. The media love him as an alternative to their guys on the left because he differs little from them on a number of positions. He would be their choice if they had to have another Republican in the White House.

McCain has tried to put his conservative credentials up front and he hopes that people will buy them. No matter how you wrap up a skunk, it is still a skunk. McCain has been involved in legislation that restricted the right to free speech and strengthen the ability of incumbents to win. He has been involved in legislation that would leave our borders weak but provide a path to citizenship to millions of ILLEGALS. Many tout the bill as amnesty though it looks more like a payoff.

McCain is a war veteran and he is Hawkish on the war. His statement that we would have troops in Iraq for 100 years was probably a realization that we would have bases there after the war much as we do in Europe and Korea. I don’t think he believes we will be fighting that war in 100 years. However, McCain has many issues that have been brought to the forefront but he ignores them or spins them with Clinton like efficiency. To add to his woes, the New York Times has endorsed him on the Republican side though they will no doubt back whomever the Democrats end up nominating. The Times is the intelligence report for terrorists and has been the enemy of the right for a long, long, time.

Today, John McCain picked up the endorsement of the country’s largest Spanish language newspaper. La Opinion endorsed Barack Obama (a blow to Clinton, no doubt) and John McCain. In its McCain endorsement it points to issues that it does not like but they are thrilled by his pro ILLEGAL immigrant stance:

The Arizona senator’s longtime position on immigration would by itself be reason enough to support his candidacy, but there are more reasons why we believe he should win the Republican primary.

His stance on immigration is reason enough to endorse him and that should give alarm to conservatives because this paper rejected Clinton, in part, because of her stance (this week anyway) on giving driver’s licenses to ILLEGALS. John McCain can say he has heard the people and he can tout that he is from a border state and understands the issue but in reality he is an amigo to ILLEGALS and he has fractured the Republican party in Arizona.

John McCain has been pushed upon the public by the media because they would like to see him as the fail safe plan if a Democrat loses. McCain has had weak positions on core conservative values and there is concern as to what he would do as president, especially if the Democrats retain control of both chambers. There are those who say that in order to legislate that you have to reach across the aisle and that is what McCain has done. Unfortunately, he has reached out on the wrong issues. There is a time to compromise and there is a time to stand firm on principles. John McCain abandoned principles a long time ago when he abandoned the POWs left behind in Vietnam.

There are also issues with his endorsements. He spews a long list of Republicans that have endorsed him. I am sure most of them have latched on in order to secure a position in a McCain administration. Rudy and Arnold are looking for jobs with McCain and I can see him making Rudy the Attorney General and Arnold the Secretary of Homeland Security. Many others who have endorsed him are no doubt friends who have served with him in the Senate or who have been involved in some of his antics over the years.

I believe that one needs to look at those who will not have a job with him. Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and countless other conservative pundits see him for what he is and are not happy with the prospect of a McCain presidency. Maybe McCain likes to believe he was a foot soldier in the Reagan revolution because Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to 4 million ILLEGALS (another Kennedy bill) but these people are the real foot soldiers in the conservative movement and we should pay attention to their opinions before taking a decision. Theirs is certainly as informed as the opinions of people jockeying for a job in January of 2009.

Big Dog

Ron Paul Triples Support in Iowa!

The latest polls are out for the GOP contest in Iowa and they show Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney in a virtual tie for the top spot. Though touted as a surprise the real surprise is that Ron Paul has tripled his support in that state. Paul polled at 2% in the past and is now up at 6% which ties him with John McCain.

Paul supporters will no doubt be pleased that their candidate’s message is getting out and giving him better numbers as the primary approaches. If Paul keeps this pace he could be the front runner by the time the polls open in January.

Keep it up Ron-bots, your message is being heard.

Source:
Washington Post

Big Dog

Let’s Hear it for the Girl, uh, Candidate

As has been posted, Hillary Rodham was terrible in the last debate and she managed to take several positions on the same issue over a span of two minutes. She has finally come out in favor of allowing ILLEGALS to have driver’s licenses. It took her about twelve hours to formulate an opinion which means she had to see how her position played with various groups and then select the one that would do the least amount of harm. Hillary left the debate acting like a victim and her campaign talked about all the boys ganging up on the girl. This has gotten the attention of one feminist [Kate Michelman] who is aligned with John Edwards:

“When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her political elevation into the ‘boys club,’ ” Kate Michelman, the former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, wrote in a posting on a blog of the liberal group Open Left.

“But when she’s challenged, when legitimate questions are asked, questions she should be prepared to answer and discuss, she is just as quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules,” Michelman said. “It’s trying to have it both ways.” LA Times

Interestingly, as soon as Hillary and her campaign became painfully aware that the picking on a woman card was not playing well, they changed positions and said that she was being attacked because she is the front runner. That should have been the position all along but they made it about her sex and probably thought that would play considering their past success with such a ploy. however, when B. Hussein Obama said that he never complained that he was being picked on because he was black it took the wind out of Clinton’s sails.

Hillary, of course, is really trying to play it both ways. She is trying to appear as a strong woman, able to mix it up with the guys, but using the victim status to appeal to women. She recently said she felt comfortable in the kitchen (as opposed to not wanting to stay home and bake cookies) and now she is telling folks to bring their mops, vacuum cleaners, and brushes [ABC] because the woman will have to clean up the mess left by President Bush. Any mess they find will not equal the stains that her hubby left behind when he was in the White House. Now that, was a mess that needed cleaning.

In any event, here she is playing to the women as if only a woman can clean up the mess but also subliminally saying that cleaning up after men is a woman’s task. This is the way she quietly plays both sides of the issue and it is what Michelman is, in part, talking about. Hillary wants to be one of the guys but she wants to appeal to the June Cleaver’s of the world as in little Hillary Homemaker. Hillary could not keep her own house clean when she was in there the first time so what makes her qualified to clean it up now? If she gets back in there and Bill has unfettered access to interns all the mops in the world will not help.

Clinton stumbled in the last debate because she was unable to answer a question that she should certainly have had an answer to. If she could not answer it, it would have been wiser to say she had not looked at it and did not want to comment. When she waffled around and took several positions, she looked anything but presidential.

Hillary has terrible ideas for this country. They are ideas based on government doing everything for people at the expense of those who earn the money in this country. She is a socialist and wants socialism for us but she cannot say that. She must appear as if she is mainstream America.

That is, until she wins. Then she can do what she wants and we will be powerless to stop her. It is all about winning and the power. Once she has that, our country will never be the same.

Big Dog

Others discussing similar items:
Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson’s Website, The Midnight Sun, , A Blog For All, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Phastidio.net, Cao’s Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Nuke’s, DragonLady’s World, Walls of the City, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, CommonSenseAmerica, Stageleft, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Hillary’s Defenders; Stop Picking on the Girl!

As much as Hillary Rodham wants us to believe that her sex has nothing to do with her candidacy her actions and words convey a different message. A candidate should be judged on qualifications and not on whether he, or in this case she, will be the first of something to hold the office. I will be the first woman, Jew, black, or whatever is not a valid reason and it is not a qualification to hold the office.

Hillary wants us to believe that she is qualified and her sex is not important to the process but then she cannot help but invoke the “I will be the first woman president” into her speeches. She has told, time and again, the story about some elderly woman claiming to wait her whole life to see a woman president and Hillary will make that dream come true. This is not ignoring her sex as a qualification.

Her campaign staff or apologizers, as I call them, have already used the “picking on a girl” mantra after Hillary’s reported poor showing in the last debate. Hillary was unable to clearly answer several of the questions and waffled on the questions and took two different positions during the same debate. Hillary was unable to express her true feelings about the insane plan in New York to issue driver’s licenses to ILLEGALS. My opinion is that Hillary did not have the opportunity to take a poll to decide which way to come down on the issue so she tried to leave an opening. Of course, the very next day she came out in support of the plan which means someone told her to support it to get the immigrant vote. This has to be the reason because most New Yorkers oppose giving licenses to ILLEGALS at all. It is possible that Hillary was trying to decide if she should answer it in a way that would appeal to general voters possibly feeling she has the primary nomination locked up. In any event, she did not exercise leadership.

Her rivals have been attacking her more ferociously lately because she is the front runner and she showed at the last debate that she has trouble when she has to defend herself and when she has to think for herself. Hillary though, has a mop up team that goes into action when the Hildebeast needs to be protected or when she needs to be explained (which usually means she made a mistake and they clarify her position so that it appeals to the group that will give the most votes).

Hillary picked up a major union endorsement and the guy announcing it gave her boxing gloves and said six guys against one girl, that was fair, she is one tough lady. This is, once again, invoking the pity party for the “girl.” Six guys did not attack one girl. Six other candidates attacked the leading candidate. However, the Clinton backers had to try and downplay Hillary’s poor performance by redirecting the focus to the issue of sex. How would it play out if Obama were the front runner and the candidates had attacked him and the statement made was “six whiteys against a black man. That is a fair fight, he is one tough brother.” I imagine that would not go over well in certain circles. The issue of sex should be just as offensive and as much of a non issue.

Hillary Rodham is running for the presidency and her sex is not an issue in the race. If she is not tough enough to handle the attacks then she does not belong in the race. If the attacks rattled her so much that she performed poorly (in addition to her not knowing what focus group to support) then this is information we need to make a judgment about her ability to handle the job. How will she act if she is attacked by a bunch of thugs at the UN? Will her people claim that the bullies picked on a girl?

All I can say is that over the last seven years George Bush has been attacked much more severely than Hillary was during the debate or has been since she announced her candidacy. The left in this country suffers from Bush derangement syndrome and they attack all things Bush. He has been called vile names, people have wished death upon him, and Hugo Chavez called him Satan and some people in this country agreed. No one came out and said that he was being picked on because he was a poor Christian or some other lame excuse.

Bush never seems rattled by the name calling and he ignores the people who engage in such behavior. Hillary can criticize him all she wants but he has much tougher skin than she does. She might want to be one of the guys but it is tough if she is going to cry like a girl when things get tough. Make no mistake, her people are saying the words for her so she is the one crying.

Related items:
The Hill
Washington Post
More at GM’s Corner

Big Dog