This just in: Mitt Romney drops out.
"Frankly in this time of a war, I cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.
"This isn’t an easy decision. I hate to lose... (this is) not just about me…I entered this race because I love America. I feel I have to now stand aside.
"We cannot allow the next president of the United States to retreat in the face of evil extremism.
* * * *
T
he wisest man on the radio, perhaps in most of the country, is radio talker Dennis Prager. Do yourself a big favor--tune in for a week and you'll be a regular.
I mention Dennis frequently and today because his observation yesterday on The Rise of The MaCain is spot on and provides a solution for the near future.
Of the conservatives' anger at McCain's evolution to the presumptive candidate for '08, Prager said, "It's not his fault, it's our fault"; how can we be angry at McCain for not following the basic tenants of conservative core values when we don't demand them of any candidate, local, state or federal, or demand they frequently express such beliefs?
How can we blame McCain for being McCain?
Today feisty and flinty Michelle Malkin similarly echos:
"Quo vadis, conservatives?
"Dissatisfied with the flawed crop of GOP candidates who lacked the energy, organizational skills, and ideological strength to carry the conservative banner and ignite your passions? Then pay attention to the next generation of Republican state legislators who do vote consistently to lower your taxes, uphold the sanctity of life, defend marriage, and cut government spending. Support their re-election bids. Reward them for standing with you instead of their Democrat opponents and the liberal media.
"Look at Barack Obama. Four years ago, he was in the Illinois legislature. Now, he’s on the cusp of the presidency."
The Reagan Revolution that paid great dividends in the 1994 sweep of Congress by the GOP was planned and carried out by an army of young conservatives headed by Newt Gingrich. With a net gain of 54 seats in the House and eight in the Senate, the Revolution ended 40 years of democrat rule which had transformed the United States from a democratic republic to a socialist nanny state.
The kill ratio was astounding... the margin gigantic in political terms, and was a very real mandate; not the razor-thin margin by which the socialists regained power in 2006.
The after action report went as follows: 12 governorships, 472 legislative seats, yielding control of 20 state legislatures; it was the first time in 50 years that the GOP controlled a majority of state legislatures. (See Malkin above).
The historic change in power was not accomplished by moderates (moderate: someone who waits for a line to form, then joins it). It was a hard-working cadre of conservatives greatly aided by the rise of talk radio and the Internet. Do not forget or doubt the connection. The conservatives showed their appreciation by making Rush Limbaugh an "honorary member of Congress" and the " Majority Maker" after he helped the GOP capture the Congress in 1994.
It only took a dozen years for the bastards to go from the "Contract with America" to the "Contract on America." Republic stopped following its core values and undid all the work begun by Barry Goldwater and Reagan in the mid-60s.
And McCain's response to this capitulation? He patronizes conservatives and especially talk radio and 'net conservatives by telling us to "clam down...."
And he said this with Joe Lieberman standing literally and figuratively behind him.
"I do hope that at some point we would just calm down a little bit and see if there are areas that we can agree on for the good of the party and for the good of the country," said McCain.
"We?" "Good of the party?" Please tell me Senator, just when has it ever been "we" and not just "you?" And when have you ever put the party ahead of yourself?
Was it on immigration? Global warming? "The Gang of 14"? McCain-Feingold? McCain-Kennedy or McCain-Lieberman?
And currently? McCain showed great resolve in intentionally missing a Senate vote yesterday on whether to give 20 million seniors and 250,000 disabled veterans rebate checks as part of a proposed economic stimulus package.
Stimulus, my assulus.
Adored by the left media as "maverick"--code for anti-GOP conservatives--it is said that he'll excel at "reaching across the aisle."
Boy is that reassuring. Seeking a bi-partisan solution in government 60-100 years ago made great sense... by and large most Americans embraced the same core values... duty, honor, country... an unambiguous moral center, small, non-intrusive government and all the rest.
How... and better why, should conservatives who still embrace such core beliefs reach across to compromise them with the democrat party is now firmly in the control of socialists who no longer believe in or proudly promote the very principles which have made America the greatest nation in the history of the world.
We didn't get here by running away from fights and our responsibilities, murdering children in the womb, or championing the "rights" of lesbian, Puerto Rican nuns who want to get married and produce test-tube babies with gay, HIV-positive disease factories and get "married" to their "life partner".
.... and then teach our children in government school, that's exactly what they must believe... while they are taught to ridicule Christianity, its right to bar military recruiters from campus, and hate our president but "understand" those who would kill us... every man, woman and child.
I'd call this a Robert Johnson crossroads moment.
Conservatives must compromise with that?
But sit it out? Vote for the enemy?.... grow up.
We, through the twin weapons of talk radio and the internet, crushed McCain's immigration compromise and we can do the same once he's president. The first aisle he must cross to accomplish anything is ours.
Straighten up, fly right, vote for McCain and let's get back to work.
Time is like the water in sponge, as long as willing to squeeze, you can always get some. -lu xun
Posted by: new era hats | April 23, 2012 at 11:41 PM
In many everyday situations there is a win-win compromise that may or may not be obvious. Other times, one side is just plain wrong and so any compromise benefits only the wrong side - and harms the right side.
Suppose a berserk pregnant nun wants to shoot every child in a school. You prefer she not shoot any of them. What is a good "compromise"? Let her shoot half? A third? One? Allow leg shots only? A lower caliber weapon?
Or, how many times should you permit a stranger to forcibly rape your little girl? Say he only asks to do it ten times... is there a compromise figure you'd be comfortable with? Would you really care if he - or anyone else - thinks you are being "fair"?
When conservatives "compromise" core values, that is just the sort of thing that is happening. What the heck are they thnking??
Posted by: DontAskMe | February 07, 2008 at 01:48 PM