It’d be like the colonials trying to ignore the King 250+ yrs ago.

It won’t work and all the anger or piss in one’s boot isn’t going to change that reality.

McCain understood that earlier than most. I didn’t like McCain’s cavorting on the Truth Express and supposedly playing the candor-role with MSM while attacking Bush 43. I really didn’t like the NYTimes’ role in the slander/sleaze about McCain’s mythical lobbyist love affair.

You see that as his demerit. Ok, I agree. You think because McCain lost it’s over.

On that note you couldn’t be more wrong, tho. What happened in 08 will affect the Party for years to come and subgroups in the base. It’ll affected political strategy. It’ll affect DIRECTLY who is the insiders choice for 2012. And when you say McCain lost, it’s over, it’s irrelevant… you demonstrate gagain that fundamental deficiency in grasping what governance is and what it is about.

Just like with those who rail against the MSM and their bias in elections.

Reality requires working with the cards that have been dealt and getting creative to play those cards as expertly and adroitly as possible.

Well, thanks for noting that –unfortunately in politics, a candidate’s public image incorporates the candidate’s “core values”. And the voter votes on the public perception of the candidate and self interest –not how well the candidate passed some soc-con’s or libertarian’s obscure Purity Test on Policy.

The MSM will be important in moving forward the candidacy of ANY candidate and how the campaign manages the MSM is critical to success. Just because some of the farRight commenters here show loathing and hatred and contempt for the MSM doesn’t mean it is a 900 lbs gorilla that can be kicked to the curb.

Get real, will ya? Stop practicing political suicide group think. It gave us Obama and turned over the govt to the farLeft… isn’t that enough damage for this century?

My recollection is that she excited the base, which was exactly the constituency that McCain dearly needed to have any hope against Obama. She was able to clearly articulate the differences between that which each party was offering America, in a fairly erudite and straightforward manner. That, to me, was exciting, anyway. Do I think she was ready for national office? No. But McCain showed that he understood who he needed to convince during his campaign, and it wasn’t moderates.

As to her family situation, I do wonder why that even matters. What exactly is it about her “family situation” that would preclude her from being elected. This seems like coded language from the Andrew Sullivan crowd of “conservatives”. I do not spend much time focusing on, say, Kennedy’s nutty family, nor McCain’s, nor Palin’s and nor Obama’s. Why would anyone really care, except for that sly double standard that holds that a female candidate must be judged by the impact of her run on her family, while a male candidate need not. I don’t recall Edwards being demonized for seeking higher office while his wife fought breast cancer. Heck, I don’t even recall him being demonized so much after it was revealed that he fathered a child with another woman while he was running for higher office while his wife fought off breast cancer. My thought is that Palin’s family is her concern, not ours, so perhaps we should butt out.

Personally, I like McCain. As an American, he has comported himself decently enough, and deserves more than a bit of gratitude for his service. As a politician, he leaves me with that “meh” feeling, as he did a majority of the electorate. I suppose we need a Goldwater of our time, someone to restore a sense of vision and purpose to the conservative movement. What I do not feel we need is a moderate in the McCain mold, and the go along to get along mentality that comes with that. Personally, my feeling is that after four to eight years of the present administration, the time will be ripe for a true conservative to step up.

Of course, if things go very poorly, probably any Republican who is nominated might win, conservative or not.

Palin? Well her family situation will just keep coming back to haunt and haunt any progress she makes on the natl stage. She’s made a bad first impression generally and that, according to guys like Rove, is a tough place to start a comeback.

Dishonorable … I’m of two minds about that. His past service was honorable, but his political service not so much.

Self-Serving … definitely.

Corrupt … I don’t think so. He did delight in grandstanding and accusing others of corruption, but he had a curious tendency to exempt his fellow political class. McCain-Feingold was predicated on the idea that politicians could only be made corrupt by outside forces. Confronting corruption within the ranks of the senate was something McCain seemed incapable of doing.

Obama Lite — Well, yes, I do believe he would have been very bad in many of the same areas Obama is, especially in collaboration with large Democrat majorities in Congress. It’s all irrelevant, though. McCain lost. He deserved to. He ran a lousy campaign. I’d rather look forward than look back, anyway.

Because, frankly, there are some commenters here who would do exactly that in 10… 9… 8…

But then I’m done trying to get reason to penetrate your pernicious mindset.

You think he was a dishonorable, self-serving corrupt politico who’d say anything to get elected. You contended earlier that his post-Election Day wish for Obama was somehow an indictment that he’d have been ObamaLite if Prez.

It’s clear to me that you can’t be persuaded to understand that your choice on Election Day directly and incontrovertibly turned over the govt to the farLeft and Obama.

I am not persuaded that you’re in this discussion for any reason other than to foment that caustic cynicism that you use so effectively on your blog sites.

The facts prove out that you’re wrong. Your position before the Election was political suicide and fraudulently misinformed. You won’t take responsibility for that and have avoided it even when the echo chamber begs “Tell us it ain’t so, Joe”.

It’s kind of a moment of irreconcilable differences. I’m intent on making my Party stronger and victorious. I’m not content as you seem to be in languishing in the political wilderness. When you finally put aside the piss-filled boots and rejoin people working to improve America, we can reengage this discussion.

Nice try at changing the subject, though.

I think V has often and rightly called the Club for Greed. It fits if you know what’s motivated their political operations and the seedy, underhanded campaign tricks they’ve used to limited success.

Maybe this is sort of you seeing the glass half empty in a bitter cynical fashion and I see the glass 1/2 full.

For crying out loud we got five –that’s 5 V– strict constructionist judges on the federal bench who weren’t going there if Bill Frist, who has since been discredited for his leadership that brought about the need for the Gang of 14, and his purist buddies had had their way.

Plus we got Sam Alito’s wife to stop crying and he made it to the bench… and will have a lasting impact on the legacy of the Court despite the likely deficit of conservative jurists that people like you may have caused by staying home on Election Day.

The Gang of 14 is about compromise, V. It’s about the ball moving forward with the hope that tomorrow or the next day another incremental step on the road to progress can be made.

Like I noted above, if you’re not in favor of compromise on tough legislative issues, I guess you don’t understand what governance is meant to be… by the Founding Fathers who you are so quick to invoke and wrap in a flag when it suits you.

You’re losing me fast, M-Matt.

Regards,
Peter H.

(“Oh, but we could have held McCain’s feet to the fire.” Yeah, right. Just like we did with Bush on spending and border security.)

He’s arguing for tax cuts that help most Americans, not just the highest tax bracket. He’s arguing against elitist tax cuts!!! My God, he’s in your camp railing against the elites and you want to poke out his eyes?

I’m sorry but a thread earlier you were railing against the supposed conspiracy of elites… and now you’re slamming McCain for doing it?

I think that hypocrisy is in overdrive for you, V. Gheesh.