Looks like John McCain is poised to secure the George H.W. Bush endorsement. It's hard to see what kind of reassurance this is supposed to give the Mac-hating conservatives since these are generally these folks hate Papa Bush, too.
« New Clinton Ad | Main | The Conservation of Virtues »
Grumpy Old Men
15 Feb 2008 04:32 pm
Comments (22)
To paraphrase that great statesman Roman Hruska, aren’t completely dishonest, unprincipled people entitled to representation, too?
Oddly enough, they seem to love GHWB's much less conservative son.
I guess Ronald Reagan is just holding out to weigh in later.
"these are generally these folks hate Papa Bush, too."
And these are generally these ungrammatical sentences generally these hurt my head.
Who knew a Harvard education has sunk so low?
I just hope that McCain doesn't have a retarded, drunken son who's about to find Jesus and get ambitious.
It's not about winning over conservatives; it's about bringing in the youth vote.
Re Richard Steven Hack
Not being a Harvard man myself (U.C. Berkeley) I have no dog in this discussion. However, a Harvard education is certainly better then an education in the federal slammer at Leavenworth, which is where Mr. Hack got his degree.
FWIW, whenever I tell Republicans my belief that first George Bush was one the best presidents in 50 years...they always get really angry.
It's not about winning over conservatives; it's about bringing in the youth vote.
That's why I hear the Bob Dole endorsement will come closer to the general election.
And MoeLarryAndJesus - watch it you might get yourself banned here too
I for one greatly enjoy the SLC - Richard Steven Hack - Chris Ford - Steve Sailer carousel. I love the fact that these guys each have specific reasons to hate the other.
tiparillo says: "And MoeLarryAndJesus - watch it you might get yourself banned here too"
Ah, go sit on a big cigar.
"I just hope that McCain doesn't have a retarded, drunken son who's about to find Jesus and get ambitious."
As I recall he has seven kids. By the looks of it four of them are sons. I don't think any of them are politicians.
Doug McCain is a 48-year-old airlines pilot and also a surfer. He states his mother, McCain's first wife, supports his Dad's candidacy. I don't know much about that, but anyway that's all I could find on him.
http://hamptonroads.com/2008/02/doug-mccain-senators-son-offers-his-own-straight-talk
Andy McCain: I find virtually nothing on him, apparently he works at his Mother's Foundation.
Jack McCain's in the Navy. Like his father he is apparently in the bottom 100 of his class, but less proned to getting demerits.
http://navy.scout.com/2/728757.html (I'm aware the link makes reading it awkward, but it's the best I could find on him)
Jimmy McCain is a Marine who recently returned from a tour in Iraq. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/13/mccains-marine-son-returns-from-iraq/ He is 19.
Judging by the interviews I found I don't think they're as inarticulate as Bush. (Who is of course not literally retarded, but merely irrational and a poor communicator) I can't judge whether any of the four are drunks, but nothing came up on that. I'd imagine they drink some as their background isn't Pentecostal, Mormon, or Muslim. Also two of them are in the military.
El Cid: "I for one greatly enjoy the SLC - Richard Steven Hack - Chris Ford - Steve Sailer carousel. I love the fact that these guys each have specific reasons to hate the other."
Yeah, but my reasons are GOOD reasons!
They're assholes - I'm just an ex-con!
Actually I don't hate Steve Sailer. I may not agree with him, but his obsessions with blacks don't interest me. And he's reasonably civil about his opinions.
SLC on the other hand is a Zionist psycho and Chris Ford is a Ku Klux Klan psycho. Compared to them I'm the "Flying Nun."
Actually, I suspect some of them are ex-cons, too - they just don't admit it like I do. If they aren't ex-cons, I expect Chris Ford at least to be a con sooner or later. Anybody with his attitude is going to end up in jail at some point - either that or be a correctional officer - which is the same thing as being in jail.
You'll also notice that I usually don't pop up in the middle of a thread having nothing to do with Israel and denounce SLC, whereas any thread I'm in he or Ford will pop up to denounce me. That might leave a clue as to who's the psycho here.
And SLC went to UC Berkeley? Does that mean he's a "liberal fascist?" We know he's a Zionist fascist. I didn't think UCB let anybody with his attitude in.
It remains to be seen whether bigotry against Blacks, Women, or Old People will carry the day.
Re El Cid
Mr. Cid forgot Don Williams in his list of characters on this blog.
Re Richard Steven Hack
One should really get a kick out of the blogs favorite bank robber calling other people names. Talk about heaving rocks from a glass house! I can't speak for Mr. Ford but I can speak for myself and I have never even been arrested, much less being an ex-con like Mr. Hack. Given the way Mr. Hack advocates the assassination of police officers and makes threats against radio talk show host Michael Savage, it would appear that he is angling for either a return trip to the big house or a sojourn at Guantanamo. Bon voyage Mr. Hack.
The Straight Talker is anything but. As the new "New Republic" has pointed out in great detail, he's a former liberal Republican who will do what it takes to get elected. His economic advisors cover the waterfront. His new stand on immigration is vague. And he is surrounding himself with the GOP establishment from the reign of King George I, so the Crony Capitalism will continue unabated.
He's almost impossible to pin down on any issue of importance except Iraq. On that he's clear: He would have gone in with more troops, and as commander-in-chief, he would have likely run the war from behind his desk on Pennysylvania Avenue.
McCain would be, as Pat Buchanan has written, a "war president". Is that what we need?
The Straight Talker is anything but. As the new "New Republic" has pointed out in great detail, he's a former liberal Republican who will do what it takes to get elected. His economic advisors cover the waterfront. His new stand on immigration is vague. And he is surrounding himself with the GOP establishment from the reign of King George I, so the Crony Capitalism will continue unabated.
He's almost impossible to pin down on any issue of importance except Iraq. On that he's clear: He would have gone in with more troops, and as commander-in-chief, he would have likely run the war from behind his desk on Pennysylvania Avenue.
McCain would be, as Pat Buchanan has written, a "war president". Is that what we need?
The Straight Talker is anything but. As the new "New Republic" has pointed out in great detail, he's a former liberal Republican who will do what it takes to get elected. His economic advisors cover the waterfront. His new stand on immigration is vague. And he is surrounding himself with the GOP establishment from the reign of King George I, so the Crony Capitalism will continue unabated.
He's almost impossible to pin down on any issue of importance except Iraq. On that he's clear: He would have gone in with more troops, and as commander-in-chief, he would have likely run the war from behind his desk on Pennysylvania Avenue.
McCain would be, as Pat Buchanan has written, a "war president". Is that what we need?
The Straight Talker is anything but. As the new "New Republic" has pointed out in great detail, he's a former liberal Republican who will do what it takes to get elected. His economic advisors cover the waterfront. His new stand on immigration is vague. And he is surrounding himself with the GOP establishment from the reign of King George I, so the Crony Capitalism will continue unabated.
He's almost impossible to pin down on any issue of importance except Iraq. On that he's clear: He would have gone in with more troops, and as commander-in-chief, he would have likely run the war from behind his desk on Pennysylvania Avenue.
McCain would be, as Pat Buchanan has written, a "war president". Is that what we need?
"Is that what we need?"
Well, if we're in a war that's what we'll get in any case. Personally I'm satisfied with any of the three potential Presidents. Ideologues, go fish. Radical Moderates rule!
Comments closed February 29, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
One of the things to be concerned about in a McCain presidency would parallel problems that occurred under George H.W. Essentially you have a guy who cares only about foreign policy, is indifferent to the fince details of domestic policy, is not trusted by the right, and in particular by the evangelical base. So what happens? They turn domestic policy over to the crazies in areas like family planning, abortion rights, educational policy, FDA and regulatory matters. So a putative "moderate" ends up with an administration easily as right wing in most respects as under "W." People should not delude themselves that McCain will govern from the middle on such issues.
Posted by Sir Charles | February 15, 2008 4:48 PM