Constitution Club

To build on Dave’s thoughts from this thread.

Self-proclaimed uber-Reaganite Mark Levin:

I don’t pretend to speak for President Reagan or all conservatives. I speak for myself. But I watched the Republican debate last night, which was held at the Reagan library, and I have to say that I fear a McCain candidacy. He would be an exceedingly poor choice as the Republican nominee for president.
Let’s get the largely unspoken part of this out the way first. McCain is an intemperate, stubborn individual, much like Hillary Clinton. These are not good qualities to have in a president.

A mastodon in the Paleo-con camp Robert Novak:

As John McCain neared his momentous primary election victory in Florida after a ferocious campaign questioning his conservative credentials…

McCain, as the “straight talk” candidate, says things off the cuff that he sometimes cannot remember exactly.

…According to exit polls, voters calling themselves “very conservative” supported Romney in Florida by two to one, and McCain still won in a state described as a microcosm of America. McCain survived a scathing assault on conservative talk radio led by Rush Limbaugh. Romney’s appeal to the right on immigration backfired, triggering Sen. Mel Martinez’s endorsement of McCain and a five-to-one vote for him by the Cuban community.

McCain as the Republican nominee would need those “very conservative” voters. He will encounter some of them at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington Feb. 7-9. His campaign Wednesday asked for McCain to speak there after rejecting an invitation to last year’s meeting. At CPAC, he might well consider providing “straight talk” about Samuel Alito and promising to veto any tax increase by a Democratic Congress.

A classical scholar of the neo-con persuasion Victor Davis Hanson: 

Were conservatives supposed to forget that a maverick Reagan raised some taxes, signed an illegal alien amnesty bill, expanded government, appointed centrist Supreme Court justices, advocated nuclear disarmament, sold arms to Iran and pulled out of Lebanon — but to remember only that John McCain was not for the original Bush tax cuts or once supported the administration’s offer of a quasi-amnesty?

The Democratic cat-fighters are doing their best to give away a once-sure general election, but the Republicans seem to be doing even more to ensure that they forfeit the unexpected gift they’ve been given.

If Hillary Clinton does end up winning her party’s nomination, November’s vote may hinge on whether moderates and liberals are nauseated enough by the Clintons’ brawling and character assassination to cross over and vote for a decorated Republican war hero — that is, if his own flag-waving party doesn’t destroy him first.

Just a Texan named Karl Rove:

- Joining the race a lot later than everyone else doesn’t work. Fred Thompson thought he could announce nearly half a year after his Republican competitors and succeed with a 21st-century version of William McKinley’s front-porch campaign — based on personality and lack of enthusiasm for all the other candidates. But you can’t waltz in late, work less than anyone and expect to light a prairie fire. People want to see you sweat and bleed for the most important job in the world. Getting in late means too few workers, talkers, phoners, askers, walkers and raisers to turn your personality and agenda, no matter how attractive, into victory.

- Ideas still matter. Both Democrats and Republicans are in spirited and, at times, heated contests. The difference is Democrats are running a nasty race that has as its subtext race and gender. The Republican race, on the other hand, is a serious debate about serious ideas. Over the last several months, we have been seeing men who represent different strands within the GOP battle each other. The debate can get personal at times-but at core the debate it is about ideas rather than personalities, which can no longer be said about the Democratic race.

I just don’t know Karl. If you listen to Ann Coulter its personal. The talk show hosts think its personal. Fox News thinks its personal. Apparently some people are mad that there is not, and never really was, a true conservative in the race. While I sympathize, and I truly do as I also believe that fiscal/social/foreign are vital, who’s fault is it? It certainly is not McCain’s. The American people are voting, not McCain, Huckabee or Romney.

The talk show host that appear the most rabid such as Rush are not even backing Mitt, possibly they seek a brokered convention. All the vitriol in the world will not “create” a true conservative, sorry. So those who bemoan that lack of real conservative could possibly injure RWR’s party enough so that we will have an angry socialist, or a naive transnationalist in the White House.

So when Ginsburg, Breyer and Stevens retire we need not even speculate about who Clinton or Obama will nominate. With newly pro-life Romney, or “gang of 14″ McCain we would have had to wonder maybe, this way there is no doubt.

McCain is not fiscally conservative enough for you, and 80s rating is not good enough? Fine, keep up the rhetoric and you can be sure we will have taxes and spending up. You can count on nationalized health care too.

Do I really need to mention what would happen to the War on Terror if Mrs Poll Follower, or Mr. Moral Relativist is elected?

No I am not saying you should vote for who the MSM is most electable, primaries are for voting your heart, just dispense with the absolutist rhetoric. I know Rush, Sean and Hugh have their brands to maintain, do you? I once told my young friend Wes, back when he still read what I wrote, that Republicans do not really win elections as much as the Democrats lose them. The Democrats are trying hard to hand us this one, lets not fight so much that the race gets too far out of reach to steal.