Rightisright, is right – donations and votes go hand in hand.

It is a (moderately) conservative mag, after all.

“hunting squirrels they’ve already killed.”

McGumbo.

On June 25th, 2008 at 11:49 am, Regulus said:

Despite McCain’s “maverick” reputation and Obama’s attempt to portray himself as some kind of secular Messiah, both are ordinary politicians: “winning ugly” is still a win as far as they’re concerned, and they’re both following conventional strategies to seize and hold the center.

The only problem for McCain is this: He has shown a great contempt for the conservative wing, moreso than any other candidate I can remember. While folks like Bush, Bob Dole, and the elder Bush could at least generally count on the conservative wing, McCain may not be able to. He’s just done far too much to anger them. It’s one thing to appear to broaden your base (as Obama appears to be wanting to do), and something different to totally move your base to the center (as McCain is doing).

In other words, McCain’s betting he’ll more than make up in twofers what he loses from dissing the base.

Thank you for telling me what I’ve known all along.

The political “center” — true independents, “moderate” Republicans and “Reagan” democrats — will decide this presidential election. Moonbats on the left and purist conservatives on the right will not, although both tend to vociferously over-estimate their importance.

Obama and McCain both know this. That is why Obama is now doing 180s on things like NAFTA and FISA, and that is why McCain is chasing after Hillary voters. Neither is much interested in placating their “hard core” base, because neither can afford to cede the middle ground to the other and both are reasonably certain that come election day their bases won’t defect to the other side.

It’s like chess: the player who aggressively fights to control the center of the board, even if it means sacrificing some of his pieces, will almost always defeat his opponent who is concerned solely with staying close to his home squares and who refuses to take any risks.

Despite McCain’s “maverick” reputation and Obama’s attempt to portray himself as some kind of secular Messiah, both are ordinary politicians: “winning ugly” is still a win as far as they’re concerned, and they’re both following conventional strategies to seize and hold the center.

And don’t forget the lessons of Britain that Ed mentions.

Britain was the greatest nation on earth, from the 17th century into the 20th. Her people benefitted from this in so many ways. Were there issues? Tons. But compared to anywhere else on earth, with the possible exception of the USA, there was nowhere better to live than England.

How about now? Is England the model of how you want to live? Being assimilated into some force-fit “Union” with other once-sovereign nations, just to survive?

When conservatives say they oppose “One World Order,” they’re not making that stuff up.

There is no more Italian Lira. No more Greek Drachma. No more Deutschmark, or Franc.

When do we lose the dollar? When do US Ships fly a UN flag, above the Stars and Stripes?

The GOP used to oppose this kind of thinking. Now? Not so much. There are elections to win, so don’t bother them with principles…

Yashmak said
I gotta 3rd the “Why?”. The Dem proposals for addressing this issue are ludicrous on their face. Any economist worth his/her salt will tell you their plans won’t help (and may in fact RAISE fuel prices further). Hell, Obama seems to want those prices to rise.

Indeed they do want those prices to rise. For the short term it will help them at the voting booth, at least that is the plan. In the long term it will make you, me and all Americans MORE dependant on government services. Europe and the UK with their $9. a gallon gas should be all the evidence we need.
Dril here
Drill now
Shoot a Liberal
Whoops, not PC
Pay less
http://www.americansolutions.com/

every elected Republican I can think of telling them that if the price of diesel fuel is over $2.50 per gallon on election day, I’m walking into the voting booth and pulling the Democrat lever.

I gotta 3rd the “Why?”. The Dem proposals for addressing this issue are ludicrous on their face. Any economist worth his/her salt will tell you their plans won’t help (and may in fact RAISE fuel prices further). Hell, Obama seems to want those prices to rise.

On June 25th, 2008 at 9:38 am, khan said:

every elected Republican I can think of telling them that if the price of diesel fuel is over $2.50 per gallon on election day, I’m walking into the voting booth and pulling the Democrat lever.

Why?

Yeah. Why?

It is the talk of Republicans right now of exploring and drilling domestically for oil, including ANWAR, and building more refineries that is making Saudi Arabia uneasy and talk of increaing their production.

every elected Republican I can think of telling them that if the price of diesel fuel is over $2.50 per gallon on election day, I’m walking into the voting booth and pulling the Democrat lever.

Why?

That means they are better and smarter than we are. 2008 is not looking good, not at all. But who fly fishes for cat?

Typical Democrat: flood the zone with giveaways, be it stinkbait or federal dollars, and bribe the voters to your side. (Example: Hey, have some free federal highway money! Just ignore that sharp barbed hook in the middle of it.)

Good one, see_dubya!