comMITTed to Romney!

I consider myself a rank amateur in politics, but I try to read something everyday to better educate myself. Having said that, I am shaking my head at some on the religious right who are making a spectacle of themselves with this whole “No Mitt/I was for him before I was against him” jive. If they don’t get themselves under control and stop flailing about and writhing on the floor over their erstwhile standard bearer, Pastor Mike “Stalking Horse” Huckabee, they are going to burn through whatever is left of their credibility.

The rest of the religious right (of which I consider myself a member) is watching and taking note of who is involved in these antics. Come 2012, when it is highly likely that the Republican Wing of the Republican Party will have to sweep up whatever mess all these folks leave behind, we will be choosing to work with reliable, loyal and competent political activists.

I provided a quote below from a comment on one of the articles on the controversy.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/04/08/religious-right-flip-flops/

• 6. by ConservativeImage 04.08.08 at 5:30 pm

It is no surprise to me that this group officially endorses Mike Huckabee as President, even after John McCain has won the nomination. It looks to me like Mike Huckabee is trying to gather as much support around him as possible to position himself well for the 2012 election cycle.

Apparently, these conservative leaders believe that combining religion and government would be best for everyone. I agree with this article that all of them are now “flip-floppers.” It is also amazing to me that many of the “conservative RINO” leaders signing this ad were from Massachusetts who obviously lost some money for the support of their own political agendas through Mitt Romney’s work to provide a surplus to the state.

It is interesting to me that Mitt Romney still took Massachusetts. If he had done so terribly there, why did the GOP in Massachusetts give him such a resounding victory? I guess these leaders are not all that they are cracked up to be! I would recommend that those who support them leave now! All of them have their own political agenda and it may not conform to what you think it should be. Buyer beware!

Share on Facebook

Share This

Must read article about the successful “flip-flop” branding of Mitt Romney by the win at any cost McCain campaign. If McCain gets his clock cleaned by the Dems this Fall, you won’t see me crying any crocodile tears. I just hope we can regain control of Congress so that we will have some ability to limit the damage done by a Democratic administration, especially in connection to the nomination of judges.

~~John Cronin~~

By: Bruce Wilson

http://www.thespectrum.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080216/OPINION/802160308

On the other hand, McCain has changed positions more frequently and more recently than Romney. Last year he was the most adamant supporter of amnesty for illegal aliens. Now McCain pretends his amnesty bill never existed. How about the Bush tax cuts? McCain opposed them twice but now wants to make them permanent. How about the influence of evangelical leaders on the Republican Party? McCain used to describe them as agents of intolerance but now embraces them. How about subsidies for ethanol production? Chalk that up as a McCain flip-flop-flip.

There are undoubtedly others, but that’s enough to make the point. In terms of sheer numbers, McCain makes Romney look like a flip-flop novice.

The press did get one thing right though. There is a Republican candidate who would say or do anything to get elected. And he’s now the presumptive nominee. Too bad the press fingered the wrong guy

Share on Facebook

Share This

From Matt Lewis at Townhall:

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Mitt Romney’s “Hero’s Journey”

Posted by: Matt Lewis at 6:00 PM

Michael Reagan says Ronald Reagan would have endorsed John McCain; He’s right.  As Michael notes: In 1976 the Ford vs. Reagan campaign for the Republican presidential nomination got so heated it looked as if my father and Jerry Ford would never again talk to one another.  When it was over and Ford had won, what did Ronald Reagan do? He simply went all-out to help Ford win his re-election, as did I and as did my sister Maureen. My dad simply followed his rule of backing the Republican candidate no matter who he was. Of course, as we have noted here on several occasions – Mitt Romney seems to be following the Ronald Reagan 1976 playbook.  His CPAC speech has been compared to Reagan’s ‘76 convention speech – and now – his endorsement is being compared to Reagan’s support of Ford …  But while Ronald Reagan’s loss — and his re-birth in ‘80 — is a fairly recent model to use as a comarision, the archetype is almost as old as time.  As Jung would put it, this entire narrative has long been a part of our “collective unconscious.”  In essence, whether he’s doing it consciously. or not, Mitt Romney is seeking to tap into a mythological narrative called the “Hero’s Journey.” If you’ve read Arthur or the Odyssey – or have seen Star Wars or Rocky — you are familiar with the idea.  Before reaching the “promised land,” a hero must first endure his “wilderness years.”  This is essentially a right of passage or initiation (I’ve written that Mitt Romney finally passed his “Initiation” into the conservative movement.)  Of course, the last stage of the “Hero’s Journey” is when the hero reaches his destiny and in a sense, rises from the dead.  If you’re a movie fan, this is the part when Rocky finally wins or when Han Solo and Luke Skywalker are given their awards.  Or if you like politics, it’s the day Reagan wins after everyone thought he was finished in ‘76. In Mitt Romney’s scenario, he becomes the Republican standard-bearer, and ultimately is elected president.

I was struck today, watching the endorsement, by the contrast in demeanor and presentation between Mitt and McCain.  Mitt - positive, affable, and eloquent; McCain - dour, testy with the press, and looking old with a twitchy right eye as he listened to Mitt.  As I’m still recovering from last week’s pull out, I didn’t know if I should laugh or cry at how absurd it was that Mitt was deferring to cranky McCain, pulling his delegates, and supporting McCain for President.  It just seemed so backwards, so appalling, so frustrating, and so wrong.  I tried to watch with an open mind, to listen to what Mitt was really saying, hoping that despite the endorsement, I’d find something to justify my intent to vote for Mitt at my upcoming county convention in Nevada, where I am a delegate.  I’m still confused. 

Anyone reading the comments of our incredible readers on the posts here today understands the pros and cons of Mitt’s endorsement, and of voting for McCain.  I know why I should vote for McCain, I just can’t quite bring myself to say I will yet.  What I do know is that Mitt is smart.  Mitt is pragmatic.  Mitt is about following the path that leads to him making a difference in this country.  I understand that many of the pundits are already painting this as another Mitt flip-flop - Mitt doing whatever it takes to get elected.  The way I see it, Mitt is doing what he needs to do, to put himself in the best position he can to effect conservative change in the country.  When Mitt said, “I can’t wait to get my hands on Washington,” he really meant it.  Mitt will do what needs to be done to get the job done.  Some label this as a type of pandering.  Again, I see it as the practical CEO delivering the goods (conservative leadership) to the customers (us).  Mitt understands that talk is cheap.  In order to be a change agent, you have to be in a position of authority to actually have the power to effect that change.  The fact that Mitt has the humility and foresight to understand this is another reason I am a true Mitt supporter.  As I said last week, I’m a Mitt supporter first and a Republican second.  If I vote for John McCain, it won’t be for the good of the party, it won’t be to beat the Dems, and it won’t be because Mitt told me to. It will be because I believe it will help Mitt continue through his “Hero’s Journey,” all the way to the Presidency.

Share on Facebook

Share This

I think if the general election were based on the intelligence of each of the candidate’s supporters, Mitt would win hands down!  If you haven’t read the readers’ comments on the last few posts in this blog - please do!  They are the best discussion I have seen on the pros and cons of where this campaign is right now.  Make sure to also check out the comments on David Kim’s post below - there is a great summary by the Mitt campaign of how they view the race right now.

Here’s an article today from Newsmax:

Mitt Romney Can Crush McCain

Wednesday, February 6, 2008 9:41 AM By: John LeBoutillier Article Font Size

Despite what the pundits, talking heads, and self-annoited experts say about the Republican race, it is more muddled and more up in the air than at any time since Iowa. Why? Because 60 percent of the Republican Party is against John McCain. And the more a dour Tim Russert or an arrogant Chris Mathews says that, he Republican race is, for all intents and purposes, over,?or this one, t is very hard to see how John McCain can be stopped,? the more agitated conservatives get. That translates to e lefty pundits who dominate the TV airwaves want McCain so we will just proclaim him the inevitable nominee.? But conservative GOP voters are rebelling against McCain; yes, he gets moderate Republicans and independents who come into the GOP primaries. But the base ?conservatives ?are voting against McCain. So I ask you this question: How can the Republican Party, with a huge base of conservatives, nominate a candidate who hates them and who they despise? This is the crux of the dilemma that is ripping the GOP apart now. Ann Coulter “Hannity & Colmes” diatribe was more than amusing. It raised this question: Who do conservatives hate more, John McCain or Hillary Clinton? The question, more than any answer, is instructive: The fact that we are even talking about this shows how divided we Republicans are and how unaccepting of John McCain we will be. We feel like he [McCain] is being jammed down our throat by the left, and by the same inside-the-beltway GOP establishment that has been, frankly, wrong on just about everything from amnesty to Dubai Ports World. The two candidates opposing McCain are both having difficulty cobbling together enough support on their own to defeat McCain; they are splitting the conservative vote and enabling a moderate-to-liberal win. And Huckabee is clearly in the tank for McCain. Yesterday rigged convention in West Virginia was designed to deny Mitt Romney a omney Wins West Virginia?headline running all day long on cable TV. While within the rules, it was a petty, ugly example of the “real McCain” at work. As the so-called GOP front-runner he should be above that kind of thing. But it tells us he [McCain] is still more afraid of Romney than he is of Huckabee. Therefore, conservatives are increasingly going to rally to Romney from here on out. And what Romney now needs to do is simple: pick an upcoming state ?a crucial one ?and make it a mano-a-mano race, Romney vs. McCain, and win it! It is time Romney beats Mccain one-on-one because if he cannot, then McCain will win the nomination by default. But if Romney draws the line in the sand and beats McCain, then we have a new race on our hands. The conservatives will rally to Romney and McCain could still be stopped. So, Mitt, get going and fast. Your task is a difficult one: take on not just McCain but the entire D.C. establishment. Let it all out . . . get angry; show some passion. Embrace the talk-radio hosts, as they represent the GOP base. Take on McCain and squash him, and soon, maybe in Ohio. Make the economy the issue. Do us all a favor.

I’m curious:  How many of you would vote Hillary over McCain?  How many would vote Obama over McCain?  How many would write Mitt’s name in?  How many would stay home?

(Nate G:  maybe you could get another online poll going?)

Share on Facebook

Share This

I admire Mitt Romney’s grit and determination and I agree that he should take the fight to the convention. The stakes are too high to do anything else.

In the event that we do not win there, then I believe Gov. Romney should follow the advise given in the article below.

~~John Cronin~~

ROMNEY SHOULD FOLLOW REAGAN EXAMPLE
boblonsberry.com ^ | 02/06/08 | Bob Lonsberry

Posted on 02/06/2008 5:32:18 AM PST by shortstop

Maybe it’s like 1976.

Maybe the Republican Party needs to go through a cleansing. Maybe it needs to be torn down so someday it can be built up again.

In 1976 the Republican bosses rejected Ronald Reagan. They mocked his conservatism and went with the liberal, Gerald Ford. We were coming out of the Nixon era, a time when about all anyone agreed on was that the Republican president had been a disappointment.

The party went with a liberal and a dynamic young guy out of Georgia – who campaigned on a platform of change – got the Democratic nod. It was a centrist establishment Republican against a Democrat outsider and the Republican candidacy went down in flames.

And America got Jimmy Carter, the most pointless president of the Twentieth Century.

Maybe this year is like 1976.

George W. Bush is Richard M. Nixon. Republicans can’t wait for him to go and Democrats absolutely loathe him. He is what people want to change, they just want to turn the page and move on to something better.

Either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton play the part of Jimmy Carter. Both have exciting candidacies that are very short on specifics. Both have the potential to be absolute failures as presidents. Like Carter, they have the potential to be one-term wonders. They have the potential to follow liberal priorities right into the swamp Jimmy Carter mired the nation in.

Somehow, Barack Obama chants things about hope in a way that gets more votes than when Jesse Jackson chanted things about hope. Somehow, people have decided to read into the Obama candidacy every unresolved political fantasy of their lives. Somehow, the media and the Democrats have decided – with a straight face – that Barack Obama is the second coming of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King.

Hillary Clinton has likewise taken on mythic proportions in the enthusiasm of her supporters.

But both Obama and Clinton will do well not to fall flat on their faces once in office.

And it’s quite likely one of them will be the next president of the United States.

Because of this year’s Gerald Ford – Senator John McCain.

He is the sort of soulless candidate who can inspire only through fear. He is a man without abiding political principle, a war hero whose war ended two generations ago. A man who in no way represents the philosophy or values of his party.

A man grassroots Republicans are going to turn their backs on.

This year is like 1976.

And Mitt Romney is Ronald Reagan.

This year, the Republican bosses are going to deny Mitt Romney the nomination. They are going to cynically play politics, they are going to go with the liberal they think can win, and they are going to value victory over principle. They are going to forget the fact that Republicans who abandon principle for success invariably end up with neither.

So it will be Jimmy Carter Take Two and Mitt Romney will go into the wilderness.

But if he is smart, he will follow the example of Ronald Reagan. Reagan used the years from 1976 to 1980 to continue his daily radio commentaries and to travel the country speaking to whomever would listen to him. He perfected his understanding of the Constitution. He spoke to group after group, preaching the simple straight-foward gospel of freedom, self-reliance, respect for life and the glory of being an American.

And at the end of four years he had not only his party’s nomination, he had one of the biggest general election margins in history.

He persisted and he prevailed and he became president of the United States.

That needs to be Mitt’s plan.

He got robbed this go ’round. His party abandoned not just him, but its own bedrock. Mitt needs to spend four years internalizing the gospel of conservatism and constitutionalism. He needs to get this stuff in his bones. And he needs to preach it across the country.

This year is like 1976.

We’ve nominated a liberal and we’ve rejected a potentially great leader.

The one will be gone soon, and – if he’s wise – the other will start preparing now for 2012.

This year is like 1976. And that one didn’t go very well for us.

Share on Facebook

Share This

See this article by Pat Buchanan, who was visibly concerned on Fox when discussing McCain’s statement last week “there will be more wars.” In an article entitled “The Great Betrayal,” Mr. Buchanan says why. Where Bush was right, McCain stood in his way, and where Bush was wrong, McCain was pushing him along:

Offering more “straight talk” on the Sunday before the Florida primary, John McCain made an arresting prediction: “It’s a tough war we’re in. It’s not going to be over right away. There’s going to be other wars. I’m sorry to tell you, there’s going to be other wars. We will never surrender but there will be other wars.”

Ike promised to “go to Korea” and ended that war. Nixon pledged to end Vietnam with honor. McCain says we may be in Iraq a hundred years and warns, “there’s going to be other wars.” Take the man at his word.

Mimicking the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann,” McCain has joked about “Bomb, bomb, bomb—bomb, bomb Iran” and urged the expulsion of Russia from the G-8. He wants to expand NATO to bring in Georgia and the Ukraine. This could mean confrontation between Russia and the United States over whether South Ossetia and Abkhazia should be free of Georgia or ruled by Tbilisi, a matter of zero vital interest to this country.

We are forewarned. John McCain intends to be a war president.

Where Bush has lately cleansed his administration of neocons, McCain offers the last best hope for a neocon return and restoration and more wars in the Middle East. And if, as seems probable, Bibi Netanyahu again becomes prime minister of Israel, he and a President McCain will find a pretext for war on Iran.

Year 2008 may prove a defining one for conservatives. For on many of the great issues, McCain has sided as often with the Left and the Big Media as he has with the Right.

Where Bush has been at his best, cutting taxes and nominating conservative judges, McCain has been his nemesis. Not only did he vote twice against the Bush tax cuts, McCain colluded to sell out the most conservative of Bush’s judges

In 1993, McCain voted to confirm the pro-abortion liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But when Bush set out to restore constitutionalism, McCain formed the Gang of 14, seven senators from each party. All agreed to vote to block the GOP Senate from invoking the “nuclear option”—i.e., empowering the GOP to break a filibuster of judicial nominees by majority vote—unless the seven Democrats agreed.

With this record of voting for Clinton justices and joining with Democrats anxious to kill the most conservative Bush’s nominees, what guarantee is there a President McCain would nominate and fight for the fifth jurist who would vote to overturn Roe v Wade?

McCain also colluded with liberals to pass McCain-Feingold, a law that denies to Second Amendment folks and right-to-lifers their First Amendment right to identify friends and foes in TV ads before national elections.

On ANWAR, too, McCain votes with the liberals, and on global warming he has moved toward Gore.

After five record trade deficits have denuded the nation of thousands of factories and 3 million manufacturing jobs, McCain is still babbling on about Smoot-Hawley. “When you study history,” he told a Detroit newspaper, “every time we’ve adopted protectionism, we’ve paid a very heavy price.”

But what history was McCain talking about? From Lincoln through Calvin Coolidge, the GOP was the Party of Protection that put 12 presidents in the White House to two for the Democrats, and the U.S. became the most awesome industrial power and self-reliant nation in the history of mankind, producing 42 percent of the world’s manufactured goods. Even Hillary, whose husband passed NAFTA with McCain’s support, has begun to question the free-trade paradigm and the disastrous results it has produced.

On controlling America’s borders and halting the invasion through Mexico, McCain collaborated with Senate liberals in the McCain-Kennedy amnesty, which was rejected only after a national uprising.

When 190,000 Arizonans petitioned in 2004 to put Prop 200 on the ballot, requiring proof of citizenship before an individual could vote or receive welfare benefits, John McCain led the GOP congressional delegation in opposing it unanimously. Prop 200 passed with the support of 56 percent of all Arizona voters and 46 percent of Hispanics.

Unsurprisingly, Juan Hernandez, the open-borders chatterbox and former adviser to Vicente Fox, has turned up in McCain’s campaign.

On the two issues where Bush has been at his best, taxes and judges, McCain has sided against him. On the three issues that have ravaged the Bush presidency—the misbegotten war in Iraq, the failure to secure America’s borders, and the trade policy that has destroyed the dollar, de-industrialized the country, and left foreigners with $5 trillion to buy up America—McCain has sided with Bush.

Now McCain is running on a platform that says your jobs are not coming back, the illegals are not going home, but we are going to have more wars. If you don’t like it, vote for Hillary.

And this was to be the Year of Change.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Hugh Hewitt was at the Long Beach rally tonight.  As always, his insight is invaluable.  Tonight, he looks forward and gives us an idea of what to expect:

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Rallying To Romney

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 12:31 AM

A large, enthusiastic crowd gathered on extremely short notice for a last minute Long Beach, California stop for Romney tonight.  I talked to the get-out-the-vote staffer who was heading back to Sacramento and the headquarters even as Romney took off for West Virginia and that state’s Super Tuesday convention.  The Romney team is wired, the sort of energy that can be faked but only flows from conviction that the political wind is at your back.  Similar reprots are arriving from Colorado and Georgia. Romney clearly has momentum in California, and a win here will send the campaign into a month of head-to-head contests culminating in Ohio and Texas in early March.  Expect Romney to challenge McCain to a series of one-on-one debates that McCain really cannot accept, underscoring the weakness of the McCain campaign if it has to match up against Obama.  Not only would McCain be overwhelmed by the volcano of money exploding for Obama, he can’t match the Illinois senator on the small screen.  The recognition of the mismatch looming is adding fuel to the Romney rally. Romney by contrast has enormous energy and an appeal built on the future, not the past.  He can easily raise the money necessary to contest the next eight months until public financing takes over on 9/1, and he would easily best Obama in one-on-ones on television. Romney has reassembled the Reagan coalition and may have done so just in time to save the GOP from lapsing into its pre-Reagan days.  If the Huck vote continues to dwindle at the rate it has been fading over the past ten days, tomorrow could have many surprises.  Romney thanked Rush, Sean, Laura, Mark Levin, Lars Larson and others among the conservative punditry for leading the rally.  If he can keep it close tomorrow, the shift to him will accelerate as the GOP decides to contest 2008 on the basis of free markets, free minds, traditional values, and victory in the war –in short, on a 2008 edition of the 1980 platform.

Share on Facebook

Share This

David Keene of the American Conservative Union (ACU) has a great article entitled “Double-Talk Jeopardy” discussing McCain’s dishonesty in the days leading up to the Floriday Primary. David has endorsed Mitt Romney. Read the whole thing, but here are a couple choice quotes below:

Most politicians who identify their interests with the national interest eventually conclude that whatever they have to do to advance those interests is justifiable; that in their case, the end almost always justifies the means. Such politicians can be dangerous and John McCain is just such a politician. In McCain’s world everything is personal: to disagree with him marks one not just as wrong, but as almost definitionally evil.

Stories of McCain’s intolerance abound in Washington. He’s attacked his fellow senators personally when they have had the temerity to actually disagree with him. Indeed, one Republican senator told me several years ago that he was confronted by an enraged McCain after voting against a minor amendment in committee and dressed down in “language that would be inappropriate in a barroom, let alone in the Senate.”

It is these qualities that concern many who know McCain best. Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran (R) is universally liked and admired by his colleagues. He’s known McCain for decades, and while he’s no camera hog, his colleagues listen when he speaks. In endorsing Romney over McCain in what many now view as a two-man race, Cochran said of McCain, “The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine.”

Help Mitt Romney win the nomination. Make a donation today and ask your family and friends to turn out for Mitt on Super Tuesday!

Share on Facebook

Share This

Very interesting comment from McCain’s mom. She recognizes the base isn’t helping her son and says we’ll all have to plug our noses and accept our fate. Wonder why there’s no GOP support? Maybe the inconsistency of his positions. She complains that her son’s support of Pres. Bush over the last 8 years hasn’t won over the GOP. Think the Bush-hating democrats won’t have noticed? If this election is about change, McCain starts at a significant disadvantage. Sorry the clip makes you endure an ad from the source, CBS, who in turn got this from CSPAN.

Share on Facebook

Share This

I just received this email from Trent Christensen. He is saying what the MSM will NEVER say. They will never admit that John “Open Borders” McCain is a paper tiger and even with the help of tens of millions of dollars in free publicity, Mitt Romney is still in McCain’s rear view mirror and getting ready to pass him on the right!

With the fawning, adoring press shamelessly promoting this liberal Democrat, and attacking Mitt Romney 24/7/365, McCain should be leading by 30% points. It is a testament to Romney’s bulldog tenacity and to his supporters competence that he has been able to endure the withering assaults of the press, the Democrats, the entrenched Washington bureaucrats and some members of his own party and is still, despite it all, fighting the good fight and doing so with good humor and enthusiasm.

Please feel free to send this to all your friends and family members and to use it as a “talking points memo” as you make your rounds this weekend.

~~John Cronin~~

From: tchristensen@mittromney.com Add Mobile Alert
To: jtc1767@yahoo.com
Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2008 02:12:05 GMT
Subject: What Republicans need to know before they vote! (PLEASE FORWARD)

Dear Fellow Romney Supporters,

We have heard a lot of feedback from Romney supporters all over the country that feel like they are not getting the real picture about Governor Romney’s chances of winning the Republican nomination for President of the United States. Many people say that the information they do receive always paints a picture of Governor Romney as losing this race. You are entitled to know how Governor Romney is truly doing in this race. PLEASE FORWARD this information on to friends and family and help get the word out about the truth about Governor Romney’s campaign!

The TRUTH is this: Governor Romney CAN and SHOULD win the Republican nomination for President of the United States. This is a two-man race between Governor Romney and John McCain and Governor Romney is literally only a few points/delegates behind! Senator McCain would like everyone to believe that somehow Governor Romney is too far behind to ever catch up. That is NOT true. We need to rally behind Governor Romney, because only a slight increase in support among conservatives is all that’s needed to tip the scales in favor of Governor Romney and conservative change!

People shouldn’t think that McCain has this rapped up. They need to understand the tremendous support that Governor Romney already has. Consider the following:

1) Governor Romney has led for most of this race and is still positioned well to win the nomination! Until recently Governor Romney has handily led the delegate count. Though he is currently in second place in the delegate count since the Florida Primary, by CNN’s count Governor Romney has 6% of the support he needs to win and John McCain ONLY HAS 8%. Translation = Governor Romney is not trailing far behind; in reality, he is right on McCain’s heels and is well-positioned to succeed in the upcoming primaries because he is the true conservative.

2) Governor Romney is the True Conservative in this race. Governor Romney supported the Bush Tax Cuts and supports making them permanent, he supports appointing conservative judges and justices like John Roberts and Samuel Alito, and he will confront and defeat radical Islamic Jihad, end our energy dependence on foreign oil, curb federal spending, and sustain traditional American values. But don’t just take my word for it.

3) True conservative thinkers all support Governor Romney. For a small sampling, consider the following sources:
- Michael Reagan, son of President Ronald Reagan:
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MichaelReagan/2008/01/31/john_mccain_hates_me

- Mark Levin:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDEzMDYzZjBkMDNhYjk0ZjdhZmJlZWNkMWQ1NjI4MGI=

- Sean Hannity: “I’ll tell you right now, and I’ve not announced this, but I will be voting for Mitt Romney in this campaign. It’s the first time I’ve stated it publicly. I’ll state it now.” (”Sean Hannity Radio Show,” 1/31/08.)

- Laura Ingraham: “All right, I’m going to see your endorsement and raise you an announcement: February 12th is the big D.C. primary, I’m pulling the lever for Mitt Romney. No doubt about it. No hesitation.” (”The Laura Ingraham Show,” 2/1/08)

- Lars Larson: “It’s time for the GOP to pick a real Republican standard bearer. I’ve been keeping my powder dry on this question for months till I had the chance to talk to all of the potential nominees. I’ve done that now, and I’m left with only one conclusion. Governor Mitt Romney is the best choice for 2008.” (”The Lars Larson Show,” 2/1/08)

4) Governor Romney has National Support: Listed at the bottom of this email are just some of the additional names of the endorsements of Governor Romney from elected officials, national figures and several publications and newspapers. (Feel free to add yours as well when you forward this on!)

5) Governor Romney has tremendous financial support, from people just like you. Not including ANY of Governor Romney’s personal contributions to his campaign, Governor Romney’s campaign has raised more money than any candidate in the history of the Republican Party! He has raised roughly $20 million more than John McCain thus far. And that financial support remains strong; in fact, the day after placing second in the New Hampshire primary—what some were calling a “big loss” to McCain—Governor Romney held a fundraiser and raised $5 million in one day. By comparison, the democrat winner in NH, Hillary Clinton, also held a fundraiser that day and raised only $700,000. This relates directly to his ability to stay the course and beat the Democrat nominee in November.

6) Governor Romney is the most electable Republican because he can fight the fight. I just mentioned money raised. Money will mean a lot in the coming months! John McCain is currently spending as much money as he brings in and is $4.5 million in debt. The Democrats have raised hundreds of millions of dollars and if Senator McCain becomes the nominee, he will have no money with which to compete with the Democrats. The Democrats will bury him with the sheer size of their war chests. He CANNOT compete with them financially.

7) Senator McCain CANNOT beat the Democrats. You cannot beat the Democrats by acting like a Democrat. John McCain has sided with the Democrats on issues from supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants, attacking the 1st Amendment with campaign finance reform, opposing drilling for oil in ANWR to reduce our reliance on foreign oil, and he voted TWICE against the Bush tax cuts. John McCain was reported to have considered running as John Kerry’s running mate in 2004. You can’t beat Democrats at their game, you need someone who talks AND acts like a true Republican leader. That is clearly not John McCain; that person is Governor Romney.

We need to unite NOW behind Governor Romney. People ought not to vote for John McCain simply because they aren’t given all the information about how strong Governor Romney is as a candidate. PLEASE FORWARD this on so that those who believe in having a strong military, and a strong economy, and strong families know that Governor Romney CAN win this election.

Governor Romney is as strong as ever in this race. And with all of us united behind true conservative principles, Governor Romney WILL win. Please forward this email on and vote for Governor Mitt Romney.

Best regards,

Trent

Trent Christensen
Romney for President, Inc.
(o) 857.288.6398
(f) 857.288.6588
tchristensen@mittromney.com

Paid for by Romney for President

Visit www.MittRomney.com for more on Governor Romney and his vision for conservative change in America.

Governor Romney Endorsements (Feel free to add your endorsement at the bottom)
Governor Matt Blunt (Mo.)
Lt. Gov. Jim Risch (Idaho)
Brig. Gen. Thomas R. Mikolajcik
Fmr. Governor Kenny Guinn (Nev.)
Fmr.Gov. Robert Ehrlich (Maine)
Gary Marx - Dir. Judicial Confirmation Network
James Bopp Jr. - Legal counsel for the National Right to Life Committee
Jay Sekulow - Chief Counsel American Center for Law and Justice
Joe Earle - Director of Outreach Iowa Christian Alliance
Attorney General John Suthers (Col.)
Rep. Ander Crenshaw (Fla.)
Rep. Bill Shuster (Pa.)
Rep. Brian Bilbray (Calif.)
Rep. Chris Cannon (Utah)
Rep. Connie Mack IV (Fla.)
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (Calif.)
Rep. Dave Camp (Mich.)
Rep. Dennis Hastert (Ill.)
Rep. Ed Whitfield (Ky.)
Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (Fla.)
Rep. Hal Rogers (Ky.)
Rep. Howard McKeon (Calif.)
Rep. Jack Kingston (Ga.)
Rep. Jim McCrery (La.)
Rep. Joe Knollenberg (Mich.)
Rep. John Campbell (Calif.)
Rep. John Carter (Texas)
Rep. Kay Granger (Texas)
Rep. Lamar Smith (Texas)
Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.)
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.)
Rep. Mike Conaway (Texas)
Rep. Mike Rogers (Ala.)
Rep. Mike Simpson (Idaho)
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (Mich.)
Rep. Phil Gingrey (Ga.)
Rep. Ralph Regula (Ohio)
Rep. Robert Aderholt (Ala.)
Rep. Rodney Alexander (La.)
Rep. Ron Lewis (Ky.)
Rep. Tom Feeney (Fla.)
Rep. Tom Petri (Wis.)
Rep. Tom Price (Ga.)
Rep. Tom Tancredo (Colo.)
Rep. Vernon Ehlers (Mich.)
Rep. Virginia Foxx (N.C.)
Rep. Wally Herger (Calif.)
Sen. Bob Bennett (Utah)
Sen. Jim DeMint (S.C.)
Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.)
Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah)
Sen. Thad Cochran (Miss.)
Sen. Wayne Allard (Colo.)
Dorothy Bush Koch - sister of Jeb & President George Bush (Tex.)
Neil Bush - brother of the President
Dr. John Wilke - Chair Right to Life Committee
The National Review
The Daily Nonpareil (IA)
The Times-Republican (IA)
Sioux City Journal (IA)
The Grand Rapids Press (MI)
The Oakland Press (MI)
Las Vegas Review Journal (NV)
Reno Gazette-Journal (NV)
Elko Daily Free Press (NV)
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (GA)
Hartford Courant (CT)
Salt Lake Tribune (UT)
Trent Christensen (MA)
John T. Cronin (MO)

Share on Facebook

Share This

I’m updating and bumping this post to highlight an update below. This story is gaining major traction.

From the San Francisco Chronicle on 2/18/2000:

“I hate the gooks,” McCain said yesterday in response to a question from reporters aboard his campaign bus. “I will hate them as long as I live.”

As you can see from my picture, I am Asian by heritage (specifically Korean). I immigrated (legally) with my parents when I was four months old. They had two suitcases, a baby, and hope for a better life for themselves and their future children and grandchildren. We have lived the American dream.

Growing up, I heard stories of what life was like during the Korean War. My parents and grandparents fled down the Korean Peninsula to make it past the Pusan Perimeter with North Korean Communist troops at their backs. Their generation reveres General Douglas MacArthur and loves the United States of America for the brave sacrifices made in the defense of liberty and freedom. These were not small sacrifices: 36,516 American dead, 92,134 wounded, 8,176 MIA, and 7,245 POW in only 3 years.

John McCain was one of 2,459 POW/MIAs from the Vietnam war. I honor his service. I am thankful for his sacrifice in a way that only someone who understands all too well that were it not for the United States and men like John McCain, I would likely be digging trenches for Kim Jong Il in a labor camp or dead instead of sitting here writing this blog post in the comfort of my home here in Silicon Valley.

I can only imagine the pain inflicted upon John McCain and his fellow POWs by his North Vietnamese captors. I can understand his hatred for these evil men. I don’t judge him for his emotions when he remembers his experience.

At the same time, I am dismayed by a United States Senator and Presidential candidate’s use of the racial slur “Gook.”

Despite being called out on it by the media and Asian American advocacy groups, he refused to apologize. He claimed that he only uses it in reference to the specific North Vietnamese who were holding him captive, as if this should make it okay.

What an individual former POW says in the privacy of his own home, or amongst his personal friends is their business. What the most famous Vietnam POW in America says to the public using the MSM’s megaphone aboard his campaign bus is not just his business. It’s America’s business.

If John McCain had been beaten and robbed by a couple African American gang-bangers, would he be justified in announcing aboard his campaign bus that he hates niggers? Or what about a couple ’spics or wetbacks? Would it be okay as long as he clarified that he was only referring to those individuals who had robbed and beaten him?

Of course not. Words have meaning no matter how many caveats you put around them. The backlash from black or hispanic groups would have been fast, furious, and justified.

I don’t believe that he is a racist. I believe that he is angry and it is a deep seeded anger which has been refined in the fires of hate deep inside his soul for decades. Nonetheless, a man of John McCain’s position and stature using this kind of language sends the message across the country that racial slurs have an acceptable role in our national public discourse. He is contributing to the coarsening of America and validating the some of the worst instincts of the ignorant among us. Afterall, if it is acceptable for John McCain can use the word “Gook” why should anyone else or society at large be held to any higher standard?

*******************************************

UPDATE: This story is getting major traction. Here’s McCain’s response from the San Francisco Chronicle via Jonathan Martin at the Politico:

“I’m not going to waste my time,” a visibly tense McCain said when reminded of his quotes in the column. “You can say what you want. I’m proud of my record, my service with my comrades. And if anyone has any criticism of that, I can only say I stand on my record and my Silver Star, my three Bronze Stars and my Distinguished Flying Cross.

Huh? What do his medals and commendations have to do with his use of a racial slur? This is the classic McCain response to anything he doesn’t want to discuss…become indignant and hide behind his military service.

Please help Mitt get the nomination. Make a donation to his campaign today.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Before you pull the lever for John McCain on Super Tuesday, please consider the following information first. As a Mitt Romney supporter, I would prefer to convince people why they should vote for my candidate, rather than against John McCain. However, I’ve tried this approach for the past 18 months, but people haven’t been able to get past his religion or the false impression that he’s a flip-flopper. As governor, Romney never contradicted a position he campaigned for in 2002 and while he did change his stance on abortion, he upheld his campaign promises throughout the end of his term. You can trust that the stances he is taking for America (which are decidedly different than the needs of Massachusetts in 2002), will be consistently adhered to while he is in office.

McCain on the other hand consistently changes positions, or blatantly lies about his record and the records of others. As accounts continue to surface about his private dealings with fellow legislators, staffers, and other private individuals, it is abundantly clear that John McCain is concerned about the one thing he’s always been concerned about—himself.

Perhaps you’ve resigned yourself to the “electability” argument, and believe that John McCain is the only Republican who could win in November. McCain will be the first one to tell you not to trust polls that come out 6 months before an election (just look at last July’s polling data for McCain). Additionally, you give the Democrats too much credit. As the economy and budget woes worsen, neither Hillary Clinton nor Barak Obama has any credibility to solve this impending crisis. On this issue alone, John McCain would be much easier to beat than Romney since he can’t run effectively on the economy. If we nominate John McCain, it will be like nominating Bob Dole all over again (and he was supposed to be the most electable at the time).

For all you know, everything I have just said could simply be made up charges for political reasons. So I ask you to take a look at the whole picture of John McCain’s life and his accelerated advancement through the naval ranks—in spite of his poor record and actions unbecoming of a Naval officer. As you read the following story of McCain’s Naval record, compare this with Mitt Romney and answer the following questions:

· Both had influential fathers, what did this give them in life?
· Both were accepted to prestigious universities, what did they do with that opportunity?
· Both had careers that ended in high-profile positions. How did they get there?
· How do their personal and family lives compare?
· What kind of people do they associate themselves with?
· What have these two candidate shown that they are good at?

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

“I have the experience, the maturity and the judgement to lead this country. Where’s that ?&%@*! button?!!!”

More on McCain’s Would-be Party Switch

A commenter to an earlier post had this to say about the reports McCain had tried to join with the Democrats officially in 2004. Perhaps he thought he could get more done “from the inside” of the Republican party. Or perhaps Kerry didn’t want him.

Is this not making everyone crazy? I mean even if liberal Republicans knew what he was up to they’d flip out! That’s why they’re still Republicans!!! Why is this not being talked about? Also, Mitt should really talk about the founding fathers wanting decent, respected men coming from their communities and contributing what they could, then returning to their livelihoods and families. They never intended for men to be career politicians! It, as they said, leads to unholy alliances!

Please pass the following around…

Take a listen to and a look at the interchange…
Go to http://mydd.com/story/2007/4/3/11936/97033 to hear John Kerry giving this interview.

John Kerry: “McCain Approached Me About Joining Dem Ticket in 2004”

“Talked to Tom Daschle about jumping the isle and becoming a Democrat”

Jonathan Singer: “On Monday afternoon I had the chance to speak with Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the Democratic Party’s nominee for President in 2004. During the interview, which covers a range of topics and which I will be posting later this afternoon, an item of particular interest jumped out at me: According to Sen. Kerry, it was John McCain’s staff who approached his campaign about potentially filling the Vice President slot on the Democratic ticket in 2004.”

Jonathan Singer: “There’s a story in The Hill, I think on Tuesday, by Bob Cusack on the front page of the paper talking about how John McCain’s people — John Weaver — had approached Tom Daschle and a New York Congressman, I don’t remember his name, about switching parties. And I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about what your discussions were with him in 2004, how far it went, who approached whom… if there was any “there” there.”

John Kerry: “I don’t know all the details of it. I know that Tom, from a conversation with him, was in conversation with a number of Republicans back then. It doesn’t surprise me completely because his people similarly approached me to engage in a discussion about his potentially being on the ticket as Vice President.”

Singer: “Okay. And just to confirm, you said it, but this is something they approached you rather than…”

Kerry: “Absolutely correct. John Weaver of his shop…” [JK answers phone]

For many Republicans, it has been bad enough that John McCain has voted and worked with Democrats against the majority of Republican Senators on a number of occasions in recent years. For Republicans, I would imagine that reports that he approached the Democrats about leaving the Senate GOP caucus in 2001 represent a borderline unpardonable offense. But it seems that reaching out to the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee to talk about running on that party’s ticket would be tantamount to the highest form of political treason to Republicans.

This story could hardly come at a worse time for McCain.

Click the link above to hear it yourself.

Share on Facebook

Share This

It’s still the economy

There, I said it. Last night’s debate once again proved that McCain and Huckabee have no sense on the economy. Are you kidding me? A cap and trade system with no limit to the taxes it imposes on the U.S.? Who does McCain represent, anyway? Mitt continues to show that despite good sounding proposals from the other candidates, his knowledge of the economy trumps their half-baked solutions. Want to solve global warming? McCain’s approach taxes U.S. citizens without a cap for a problem we’re only a part of. Want to stimulate the economy? Huckabee’s solution of using infrastructure projects sounds good, but as Mitt points out, they take years to develop. These are insights that McCain and Huckabee couldn’t come to on their own, suggesting their programs as President would continue to have similar flaws. As usual Mitt’s responses were the most thoughtful, substantive and intelligent. For me, in my relatively few 41 years, I saw Reagan take office with little foreign policy experience and end up winning the cold war. McCain’s Vietnam experience was 30-40 years ago and not as relevant now. Mitt would be a fantastic commander-in-chief. But I’m not ready to see John McCain try to run an economy he barely understands, taking risks with my pocket-book along the way while collecting his government salary and living off his wife’s riches. Mitt’s lived in the real economy and has had to perform in a real job, as well as in government. He’s lived in both worlds; McCain has lived in one, out of touch with me and mine.

Kudos to My Wife

Kudos to my wife for finding the following useful information pre-Super Tuesday:

1. Someone on a Canadian website calls it like it is for U.S. Republicans and their choice of Mitt vs. Mac. This person isn’t even a Mitt fan, but recognizes the choice of McCain would be disastrous. If you’re a Republican reading this, whether conservative or moderate, think about John McCain essentially having free-reign to sign bills into law that a liberal Democratic Congress sends to his desk. Do you think he’d stick with Republican ideals? I really don’t think so as his record indicates otherwise.

2. The National Review seems to remain a voice of reason on Mitt vs. Mac. McCain’s coronation is pre-mature. Sure we would have liked to have had Florida, and we’d have been saying the same things about our being a front-runner if we’d won. But the truth would have been, as it is now, that Mitt’s leading in a number of Super Tuesday states, and the race is unlikely to be decided even afterward. See this link for recent analysis from National Review Online.

Super Tuesday: Who Wins Your Confidence?

With 23 states and, as I recall, a thousand or so delegates up for grabs Tuesday, McCain’s “imposing” lead is how many? Twenty-eight whole delegates, according to CNN. This race is not about those delegates, but about winning the 40X that amount available Tuesday. And even then, the GOP nominee still won’t be decided. This cite is from USA Today:

There will be more than 1,000 Republican delegates at stake on Feb. 5, enough to give a candidate a substantial boost toward the 1,191 needed to win the nomination — but only if one man emerges victorious in numerous states.

“I think you could have two or three viable (GOP) candidates” following Super Tuesday, said Ohio Republican Chairman Robert Bennett.

“Somebody’s going to have some big wins, but you’re going to go into March 4, and you’re not going to have an apparent (GOP) nominee,” Bennett said.

So the race is still up for grabs.

If you’re a California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, etc. etc. voter voting this Tuesday, and you’re choosing between Mitt and Mac, think about who’d you rather have trying to stem the tide from a Democratic Congress: Mitt Romney, the consistent choice of the conservatives in every state so far, or John McCain, choice of the liberals.

Don’t think it matters? Remember the recent debate about expanding SCHIP, the welfare program Congress wanted to expand by multiple billions of dollars? Democrats in Congress passed it, but who stood in the way? President Bush. Without his veto pen, we’d be looking to foot that tax bill now when it’s become clear that tax rebates are required to stimulate the economy, and not huge welfare projects that increase the deficit. When the next bill comes to the desk of the President, and we know it will come, are we confident McCain would vote according to Republican principles? If you think so, think again: McCain was one of two Senators to vote against the Bush tax cuts (McCain admits he was wrong, but if he’d had his way the economy would have been tanked); illegal immigration (McCain supported a permanent residence for illegals, and now only partially admits he was wrong and has assumed Mitt’s position on securing the border); campaign finance reform (he’d do it again); global warming (bad approach, and he’s a co-author). It’s nice to admit when you’re wrong, but it’s even better not to be wrong in the first place on issues that will cost us billions. On issues as complicated as the economy, and even on national security, we need an intelligent man who can figure out what to do before he forms an opinion.

We are not alone.

All us Mittsters, and those who feel they align with Mitt but aren’t sure about voting for him due to the press’ coronation of McCain, should realize that there are a lot of people out there that are looking at Mitt vs. Mac for the first time, whether because they left Fred or Giuliani, because they realize Huckabee isn’t going to win (just look at the Ron Paul-like marginalization of Huckabee in last night’s debate) or whether they just can’t stomach McCain and his liberal past, and Mitt will win among principled Republican voters. Let’s also remind ourselves of the hundreds of thousands that have already voted for Mitt: the total number of voters who have decided 1st vs. 2d in Iowa, NH and FL has been very small. I’d be interested in seeing what the current popular vote count is (the difference between McCain and Mitt is not large). And if we work to get Mitt more delegates than McCain on Super Tuesday, McCain’s 28 delegate lead will recede into memory.

No Scaling Back Now

Some reporting went on this morning about Mitt scaling back advertising, but the National Review pointed to this article at Yahoo to the contrary.

McCain Stole Florida

For those of you first-time readers, you should realize that John McCain’s apparent momentum (all of 5% of the voters in Florida) was the result of what many have reported to be dirty politics. In 2000 McCain got am-Bushed in South Carolina with lies and innuendo. The people who did it to him worked for George Bush, and now work for McCain. And they pulled a similar trick last weekend: they purposefully distorted Mitt’s record supporting the surge and as Massachusetts governor. Issues aside about the actual record (both issues are Mitt strengths), many media outlets have continued to ask McCain about this (including in the debate last night) because it takes a real contortionist to come up with an argument that McCain was using “straight talk,” and Mitt of course called McCain on it. The media then said the fight was getting “nasty,” but in reality it was Mitt responding to lies about his positions. The resulting swing, based on McCain’s untruth’s and the public’s perception of the race getting ugly, turned some in McCain’s favor. Of course it’s ugly to call someone dishonest, but it’s even uglier if that claim is true. In addition there were reports of lots of mis-deeds reported elsewhere on this site. Bottom line: don’t be fooled by the reported “momentum.” The margin of victory wasn’t significant, conservatives are voting for Mitt, many when faced with Mitt vs. Mac are repulsed by the latter, and, last but not least, the most qualified candidate is still Mitt Romney, who hasn’t resorted to the sorts of dishonesty as McCain has.

Huckabee Supporters’ Coming Crisis of Conscience

If you’re a Huckabee supporter, I believe you have a real crisis of conscience developing. Should you support Mike, who represents your views on social issues but is unlikely to get beyond Tuesday, or do you bet on Mitt or Mac. With McCain’s less than solid record on social issues (other posters help me out here), you may want to consider whether you’d be comfortable with McCain as the candidate. Mitt may be your only choice for a real, pro-life, pro-family, anti-gay marriage candidate. It’s been nice to have Mike in the race I’m sure, as he probably looks like folks you know and see in church on Sunday. But who’s closer to your real ideals, Mitt or McCain? I believe it’s Mitt, and would encourage you to really think about who you’re voting for Tuesday. Damaging Mitt for Mac’s gain is counter-productive to your real concerns, and I believe it’s time to switch horses. It looks like Fred Thompson’s supporters have come our way, and it’s likely many Rudy supporters (though not all) will move to McCain. Who are you most like? Conservative Fred, or socially liberal Rudy? Notwithstanding our candidates’ disagreements, we’d welcome you into the fold.

What you can do to help win

Super Tuesday isn’t about Mitt, it’s about us. He carried the load in the “retail politics” states of Iowa, New Hampshire, etc. But now we need to get out in our own areas with signs, buttons, phone calls and reach out to everyone we know to pull them into Mitt’s fold. So, no. 1, get out and vote. No. 2, make those calls if you’re in the campaign. Talk to friends. If they’re pro-Mitt, or supported Fred, Rudy or Huckabee, tell them they have a choice: Mitt vs. Mac, and they need to choose who they really want. Let’s go.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Though I provide analysis below, I do not suggest I have answers to the questions I raise. But I do raise questions that I think are of critical importance and consideration; not just to this current presidential contest, but more importantly to America. These are questions I think nobody wants to discuss (see photo below).

Tonight (1/29), I have heard the term “lick their wounds” several times. That is not at all how I feel about the loss in Florida. It is fair to say, I believe, that America as a nation, has matured in its history to a point in which a woman or a black man can be elected President by a majority of both sexes and a majority of those of the white or black races. I believe that America has come of age to the point that the bigotry we call sexism and racism, though still engrained in some people, has been marginalized.

What about the bigotry of religious intolerance? In an enlightened age, it is known by all that bigotry of any kind is not acceptable. In this modern day, we don’t generally hear statements of bigotry in common language in ways that were pervasive as recent as the 1950s and 1960s. Religious bigotry was even out in the open at that time as evidenced by evangelical ministers that routinely and publicly denounced the idea that Americans might vote for a Catholic. Today, bigotry of any kind, as a matter of common discussion in mixed company, is simply unacceptable in today’s diverse age. As a result, we do not hear public discussion about religious bigotry. Does that mean that this form of bigotry has also been marginalized to the point America can elect a Mormon? I do not believe it has. In fact, I think it is still pervasive, if now private.

In the states in which GMR won the Silver, by how much did he miss the Gold? Usually around 5%, maybe 10%. Today, he missed the Gold by 6% in a very large state. Since I began to seriously pay attention to presidential politics for 2008 back in 2006, I have seen poll results showing that a fair number of Americans are unwilling to ever vote for a Mormon; anywhere from about 20% of those surveyed to 40% recently. Since I have always concluded that America has matured to the point at which religious intolerance has been effectively marginalized, I more or less dismissed those poll numbers as based on simple ignorance, not bigotry.

Then, as the early state caucuses and primaries became history, I started to see a trend that I saw repeated today in Florida. It is fair to say that a majority of Americans do not find McCain acceptable as President as evidenced by his votes of 35% compared to 65% to all others. But to understand whether bigotry is at work against MR specifically, we need to drill down into the numbers. Is it not also fair to say that the most conservative voters of all would not be generally attracted to McCain, who is a well-known liberal Republican, or at least a Republican that cannot be trusted?

[In order to keep this commentary from becoming longer than it is, I use only the initials of candidates’ first and last names and any time there is a number, it represents a percentage]

In Florida, among evangelicals, the votes were JM(30), MR(29), MH(29). We can conclude that the 29 who voted for M