CONSERVATIVES: IT’S TIME TO PUT UP OR SHUT UP
The same elite pundits who told you a couple of days ago that Mitt Romney could still win are the same ones who now say John McCain is the “presumptive nominee.”
Don’t you believe it.
They say “Mitt ran the numbers” and determined he couldn’t win.
[Of course Mitt couldn’t win because he lost (and would continue to lose) to Huckabee AND McCain in several of the bed-rock conservative states. The numbers didn’t add up in a THREE WAY RACE]
These elites wistfully pined for a “two man race.”
They said if Romney could only get ALL of the conservative vote, that he could “stop McCain.” They all but tried to run Mike Huckabee “out of town on a rail” as some sort of demonic “vote splitter.”
[As it turns out, Romney was the “vote splitter.” Romney was the one that dashed conservative hopes, toyed with conservative emotions, and wasted money and time. The Romney votes apparently were the ones that were helping John McCain]
Now, conservatives have the “two man race” the elite pundits all clamored for.
But it's Huckabee vs. McCain!
Governor Huckabee is a solid Reagan conservative. His record of executive governance is one that tracks well with how Ronald Reagan led in California. He did the same things that Reagan did. He governed as a RESPONSIBLE, TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVE.
Certainly, libertarians and quasi-anarchists who don’t care about the quality of our roads or our public schools or our hunting and fishing have attacked Governor Huckabee because he governed as a responsible, budget-balancing Federalist instead of stripping Arkansas government bare. These purist critics have never run much of anything and probably could not be elected to dog catcher (besides having a dog catcher is probably just more “big government.”).
Common-sense conservatives throughout Iowa and the solid Republican South have looked past the empty rhetoric and at the man Mike Huckabee. And his wins in some of the most conservative places in America demonstrate that voters know Huckabee is a Reagan conservative. His record on social conservative issues is bulletproof. His plan for taking America forward is more conservative than any other candidate in this race.
Huckabee is running against a “foot soldier of the Reagan Revolution.” Of course, it doesn’t do much good to be a “foot soldier” if your weapon is turned against your own side.
The Anti-McCain conservatives claim that McCain is a “foot soldier” who too often crosses the battle lines and fights for the other side.
They cite McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman, McCain-Kennedy-Edwards, etc. They point out that McCain SUMMARILY rejected the evidence from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and defended John Kerry. They claim McCain not only thought about running with Kerry against George W. Bush in 2004, he clandestinely solicited that position!
They charge McCain said that Justice Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. was “too conservative” because he “wore his conservatism on his sleeve.” They question whether he will make good on his promise to appoint justices in the “mold of Alito and Roberts.” They fret over McCain’s rhetorical slights to brilliant conservative justices Scalia and Thomas. They winced at his praise and admiration for the moderate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. A few predict McCain will appoint more “empty Souters” if only to preserve McCain-Feingold.
Some of the more radicalized elements fret about his hair-trigger temper and his prickly personality. Some gossip about his allegedly checkered family life. Some Romney-ians questioned McCain’s understanding of markets and his commitment to “profit.” Some point out that McCain lacks private sector experience. They dig back into McCain’s past as one of the infamous Keating Five. Some make wild charges against McCain so outrageous that they cannot and will not be repeated here.
In summary, many conservatives rage against McCain with almost the same vigor and passion as they blast Hillary Clinton – or perhaps even more.
What will these conservatives do now?
If they are correct about their numbers and their influence, they know that McCain cannot win the nomination without their acquiescence.
If the "anybody but McCain" (“ABM” )conservatives are serious about what they believe about McCain, they will switch to Huckabee. If they really want to “stop McCain,” they will switch to Huckabee.
Huckabee is a true traditional conservative and still can earn enough delegates to take the fight to the convention floor. At the convention, anything can happen.
Otherwise, the "ABM" conservatives should just be quiet and fall into line for the "presumptive nominee."
Will they “put up or shut up?”
The same elite pundits who told you a couple of days ago that Mitt Romney could still win are the same ones who now say John McCain is the “presumptive nominee.”
Don’t you believe it.
They say “Mitt ran the numbers” and determined he couldn’t win.
[Of course Mitt couldn’t win because he lost (and would continue to lose) to Huckabee AND McCain in several of the bed-rock conservative states. The numbers didn’t add up in a THREE WAY RACE]
These elites wistfully pined for a “two man race.”
They said if Romney could only get ALL of the conservative vote, that he could “stop McCain.” They all but tried to run Mike Huckabee “out of town on a rail” as some sort of demonic “vote splitter.”
[As it turns out, Romney was the “vote splitter.” Romney was the one that dashed conservative hopes, toyed with conservative emotions, and wasted money and time. The Romney votes apparently were the ones that were helping John McCain]
Now, conservatives have the “two man race” the elite pundits all clamored for.
But it's Huckabee vs. McCain!
Governor Huckabee is a solid Reagan conservative. His record of executive governance is one that tracks well with how Ronald Reagan led in California. He did the same things that Reagan did. He governed as a RESPONSIBLE, TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVE.
Certainly, libertarians and quasi-anarchists who don’t care about the quality of our roads or our public schools or our hunting and fishing have attacked Governor Huckabee because he governed as a responsible, budget-balancing Federalist instead of stripping Arkansas government bare. These purist critics have never run much of anything and probably could not be elected to dog catcher (besides having a dog catcher is probably just more “big government.”).
Common-sense conservatives throughout Iowa and the solid Republican South have looked past the empty rhetoric and at the man Mike Huckabee. And his wins in some of the most conservative places in America demonstrate that voters know Huckabee is a Reagan conservative. His record on social conservative issues is bulletproof. His plan for taking America forward is more conservative than any other candidate in this race.
Huckabee is running against a “foot soldier of the Reagan Revolution.” Of course, it doesn’t do much good to be a “foot soldier” if your weapon is turned against your own side.
The Anti-McCain conservatives claim that McCain is a “foot soldier” who too often crosses the battle lines and fights for the other side.
They cite McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman, McCain-Kennedy-Edwards, etc. They point out that McCain SUMMARILY rejected the evidence from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and defended John Kerry. They claim McCain not only thought about running with Kerry against George W. Bush in 2004, he clandestinely solicited that position!
They charge McCain said that Justice Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. was “too conservative” because he “wore his conservatism on his sleeve.” They question whether he will make good on his promise to appoint justices in the “mold of Alito and Roberts.” They fret over McCain’s rhetorical slights to brilliant conservative justices Scalia and Thomas. They winced at his praise and admiration for the moderate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. A few predict McCain will appoint more “empty Souters” if only to preserve McCain-Feingold.
Some of the more radicalized elements fret about his hair-trigger temper and his prickly personality. Some gossip about his allegedly checkered family life. Some Romney-ians questioned McCain’s understanding of markets and his commitment to “profit.” Some point out that McCain lacks private sector experience. They dig back into McCain’s past as one of the infamous Keating Five. Some make wild charges against McCain so outrageous that they cannot and will not be repeated here.
In summary, many conservatives rage against McCain with almost the same vigor and passion as they blast Hillary Clinton – or perhaps even more.
What will these conservatives do now?
If they are correct about their numbers and their influence, they know that McCain cannot win the nomination without their acquiescence.
If the "anybody but McCain" (“ABM” )conservatives are serious about what they believe about McCain, they will switch to Huckabee. If they really want to “stop McCain,” they will switch to Huckabee.
Huckabee is a true traditional conservative and still can earn enough delegates to take the fight to the convention floor. At the convention, anything can happen.
Otherwise, the "ABM" conservatives should just be quiet and fall into line for the "presumptive nominee."
Will they “put up or shut up?”
Labels: John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney
posted by Editor at 07:07
9 Comments:
I agree that there is nothing particularly liberal about ensuring that our roads, schools, and infrastructure is maintained. I also respect how Huck always stood by his record instead of running away from it. Especially because he has a good record.
This is where the Conservative Reformation starts. With a genteel civil war between true conservatives. If you're against RINO liberalism as exemplified by McCain, then the ABM's need to rally around Huckabee. If not, then you're just a sell-out, and you have one foot planted firmly in the RINO camp, and have no business calling yourself a true conservative.
Choose this day: Either McCain or Huckabee.
Either choose RINO liberalism or choose True Conservative Principles. McCain or Huckabee.
Put up or shut up. The crux of the Conservative Reformation starts here with this decision. Does the GOP shift leftward with McCain or does the GOP remain true to its conservative heritage in Huckabee? Choose this day all of you who call yourselves a true conservative.
For me, I choose Huckabee. Staunchly.
P.S. This post is not directed to long-time McCain supporters. This post is directed towards all those who've disliked McCain in the past for not being a true conservative.
Choosing Huckabee over McCain would be the same as choosing Paris over Britney. You have got to be kidding. Didn't they teach you anything at accounting school? or is the only thing you're good at is "cooking books"?
Rude, crude (and eventually you'll be screwed) to the end, you pathetic windbag.
Anonymous, your comment doesn't even make sense.
Mike Huckabee has a long, distinguished record as a conservative governor and a positive, conservative agenda for America.
He is in no way analogous to some unaccomplished "pop tart." Your comments suggest a bias driven from ignorance. Go to www.mikehuckabee.com and learn something.
Stop just relying on Rush and the Club for Growth to do all of your thinking for you.
The only reason McCain and Huckabee remain is because all of the McCain, Huckabee, Thompson and Giuliani camps prearranged to dispose of Governor Romney. Mitt pulling out had nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not he'd be a good president. The "boys club" didn't like him (just like junior high, folks), and spent a good deal of their own time and (donated) money to get Romney sacked. The fact remains, neither McCain nor Huckabee have half the brains, half the talent, and half the loyalty to America that Mitt Romney has. The party is split. Get used to it.
Romney was the only conservative who could have stopped McCain -- and you folks passed on that simply because the Huckster was evangelical. McCain became friendly with Huck because he needed him to stop the ONLY conservative who could stop him. You have been played the fool and now reap what you sow.
You remain delusional that McCain could now be stopped. You really do have absolutely NO grasp on reality and the election as it stands. You are the ones who have given away our hope for a bowl of pottage.
You are so blinded by your religious bigotry that you can not see that conservatives, from National Review to Laura Ingraham, from Sean Hannity to Hugh Hewitt, from Rick Santorum to Rush and the Club for Growth, analyzed what Huck had done and found him NOT to be a fiscal conservative. Fred and Mitt were the true all-around conservatives and now you ask us to vote for somemthing else. No thanks.
Huckabee and folks like you, who try and impose a religious litmus test for candidates are a greater danger to America than anything McCain could do. It is you, with your anti-mormon rhetoric on this site that poses a danger to America. In you and Huck's America, mormons are not qualified to run for office -- not based upon our character or our ideas and actions, but because of our faith. No thanks.
Baptist preachers are a dime a dozen.
But successful governors of Arkansas aren't.
"[C]onservatives, from National Review to Laura Ingraham, from Sean Hannity to Hugh Hewitt, from Rick Santorum to Rush and the Club for Growth, analyzed what Huck had done and found him NOT to be a fiscal conservative."
I analyzed for myself what he did and I determined that he was as conservative as California governor Ronald Reagan.
The most of the elites name-dropped above didn't like Huckabee because he wasn't one of their little social club. The Club for Growth didn't like him because they're (in my opinion) more Libertarian than Republican, and a bunch of Romney supporter money went into their coffers (according to media reports).
Conservatives who think for themselves are choosing Mike Huckabee.
Post a Comment
<< Home