Redstate

Conservatives just lost the primary that's all. Deal with it. Learn from the mistakes. Don't just whine and insult the winners.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

The only thing I will say is that in terms of "raw intelligence" -- whatever that is or how you define it -- I do think that Obama is more intelligent than Hillary. But "intelligence" does not always equal competence.

Actually, there is something else I may disagree with you about. I think John McCain may actually end up being very good for both conservatism and the Republican Party. The problem is that too many times when President Bush went "off the (conservative) reservation" we conservatives either said nothing or our opposition, while there, was too muted. What happened to our voices?

Fortunately, when McCain goes "off the reservation," I don't think we will be so silent. And that is a good thing for conservatism, the GOP, and our country.

I disagree with your last point. I think republicans will support mccain when he "goes off the reservation" Bush went off it a lot and the only time we fought him was the Hariet myers fiasco and dubai ports. He made permanent a lot of liberalism. No democrat left behind, prescription drugs entitlement, campaign finance reform, unbelievable spending and deficits, and more.

A mccain election would be a disaster for conservatism and the republican party. But I honestly believe mccain's chances of being elected are close to zero.

But we already complain about McCain for doing many of the things that we are giving Bush a pass for doing. Plus, I do think McCain is much, much, much better than Bush on spending.

Not me. I did not give Bush a pass. I am afraid he will go down in history as the man who lost the republican majority.

By many accounts, the two most intelligent guys we've had run for president in the (relatively) recent times were Jimmy Carter and Adlai Stevenson. Stevenson, thankfully, never became president. Carter, sadly, did.

Reagan may not have been as smart as Carter -- but even most honest liberals will tell you that he was a better president...and most others will say he was a far, far better president.

People who know Hillary well say that she's deeply intelligent. I don't find that hard to believe. I also don't find it hard to believe that Obama is very intelligent.

But there's nothing in Obama's record to suggest any sort of executive competence. There's not much more in Hillary's record -- things she touched in her husband's presidency usually turned to dust.

But I do think that her husband was pretty competent as president (where he wanted to be, anyway). Needless to say, I didn't agree with a lot that he did. But there's some record of accomplishment there.

Intelligent is overratted. I personally think Barack Obama is very intelligent. I also don't think he is fairly competent.

I believe that so far, running a presidential campaign has been the toughest thing that either Hillary or Barack has done, and that running a national campaign is a very good indication of executive ability.

If you look at where both the candidates started, with the respective resources each had, and compare the results thus far, I believe it becomes clear just what kind of executive competence Barack has, when measured against Hilary.

I would say the same thing about McCain. He managed to recoil from his campaigns early gaffes. McCain realized that his spending was ineffective and was going to bankrupt his campaign, and made the drastically necessary corrections. Clinton never did this. She didn't take Barack seriously enough early enough. Much like I fear she would do to the Country, She just kept spending and spending, and even had to loan her campaign money at one point (A luxury our Country does not have.)

It is not Barack's lack of executive ability to worry about, it is precisely the opposite. If he gets the nod, he will be able to enact his policy much better than Hillary.

Can somebody remind me again how we ended up with John McCain as our nominee? Have we really fallen that far? If so, why?

Sure. I'll be happy to remind you of that.

John McCain is the perfect nominee for a party that has made open-ended war in Iraq the centerpiece of its policy.

A year ago, McCain's campaign was given up for dead. Back then, the Iraq War was falling apart and the congressional Republicans were being stampeded into joining the Democrats in calling for withdrawal. McCain bucked this trend and demanded an even stronger military push in Iraq--the first and (for quite a while) the only GOP candidate to do so.

This Bush did. And the surge produced tangible results. McCain was seemingly vindicated, and his campaign received a shot in the arm.

If you want to make fighting the Iraq War the centerpiece of the GOP foreign policy, then McCain is your guy. He's been the most steadfast and the most eloquent about it.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

...I would reiterate McCain's own words ending a "60 Minutes" interview when his campaign seemed doomed and he was asked whether his steadfastness on Iraq was costing him his shot at the White House.

He said "I'd rather lose an election than lose a war."

I'd agree with him on that. I'd shoulder a tremendous amount of other costs before I'd support something which would contribute to America's defeat on the battlefield. Nobody can go back and undo the decisions made in 2002 and 2003 (or any other time, for that matter).

We are where we are -- and we need to deal with where we are, not where we'd rather be.

History may well show that Bush and Iraq will be to the GOP what Truman and Korea were to the Democratic Party (that is, something that worked against them politically for a period of time). Or it might also show that they were to us what LBJ and Vietnam were to the Democrats -- that was something that's had a much more profound and lasting effect on that party.

I don't know. But I do know that defeat ought never be an option for us. We need to finish that which we start -- especially if it involves military engagement.

I think there are other reasons we ended up with McCain. And I'm not happy about it. But, whatever the reasons, political expediency is no reason to lose a war.

Thank you for reminding me that -- while there are many things I can and do disagree with McCain about -- there is at least one reason why I can PROUDLY pull the lever for him.

If she makes it through the primary we can all work to defeat her in November and you keep your job ;)

Fight On!

America is resilient. And she's no revolutionary.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Bill was POTUS ....... he had the power. She just wanted him to share. He is MUCH more practical and less idealistic than she is. That is why she 'disappeared' after the health care fiasco.

Someone that advocates children having the right to sue their parents, is a radical in my book.

She idolized Saul Alinsky.

Her senior honors thesis in political science is entitled " ‘There Is Only the Fight...’: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model."

Barbara Olson, charged in her book that the thesis was locked away because Clinton "does not want the American people to know the extent to which she internalized and assimilated the beliefs and methods of Saul Alinsky."

NO ONE knows how 'revolutionary' Hillary really is. She CANNOT be trusted. She is a liar and a crook.

The choice between her and Barack is like choosing whether you want to be pursued by a trained and experienced assassin or someone who is shopping for their first gun.

People sure have short memories.

I suggest you consider the possibility that others may have studied the Clinton administration, remember those facts, and come to a different conclusion, rather than dismissing anyone who disagrees as having faulty memories for the facts.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

People have short memories. That's my opinion and I believe it is supported by facts. I have no idea whether you do, or not. That is why I did NOT say that.

9/11 and it's implications sure don't seem to have much 'front of mind' presence to many these days. That was much more impactful and more recent than the Clinton regime.

You can't ask Jim McDougal either he has been with Vince Foster for years.

Hillary would be a disaster as President -- Obama would be a disaster x 100.

Unlike the liberals who pretend disasters never happen and then whine for the government to come save their unprepared stupid behinds, as a conservative I believe we must avoid disasters we can and prepare for those we can't. I believe HRC and BHO are avoidable disasters.

M Penny

NEITHER Democrat is acceptable. There is little difference and not very thinly veiled auras of being disingenuous and dishonest.

Seeing them any other way would require "a willing suspension of disbelief."

--------------------
Vista really sucks!

Because that's the only way McCain gets the conservative vote. If you make me focus on him, I get so discouraged that I want to throw up my hands. So instead we focus on the opposition and say 'McCain s**ks less'.

I may, in the end, come around to voting for him, if he can just stop reminding me what he stands for. But if I do, it won't be a happy vote. It will be one of gloom and despair, knowing the damage that's coming.

and you just KNOW that a couple of those old and unhealthy lefties on SCOTUS have been just holding on hoping to outlast the Bush presidency.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

Until then, he still has to EARN it.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

This isn't Kos. We frown on profanity here.

BTW, "Reply to This"...

;)

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J