ANTI-HILLARY RINO BECOMES ANTI-LIMBAUGH DINO
....could this election get any wackier?
Tom Maguire wants to know. (Via Glenn Reynolds, who calls McCain the Unity Candidate.)

Tell you what. The front page of today's Inquirer promises "an absolute zoo," as the election is coming to Pennsylvania, ready or not.

The problem is, Pennsylvania is where I live, and I don't think I'm ready for the coming absolute zoo.

As things stand right now (at least, at this point in the post), I'm a Republican for McCain. As he is now the officially, formally recognized candidate, if I remain Republican I would have no reason to vote at all on April 22, and the absolute zoo will pass me by.

Unless that is, I do something about it, and fast. The way I see it, Hillary is going to win this state, and the forces of Rush Limbaugh are going to do their damnedest to increase her margin of victory. This, it is believed, will help John McCain. Not only do I disagree with this approach, but I distrust it. Almost without exception, Limbaugh and the other major Hillary promoters hate John McCain and make no secret of it. So I am deeply suspicious of their claim that they are "helping" John McCain by helping Hillary at the polls.

I think this might very well have the opposite effect. Yesterday's election results demonstrated the fragility of Obama's house of cards, because the Obamamania is already starting to wear off. I predicted that in the long term, he would be the weaker of the two candidates for this very reason, and that he, not Hillary, would be the easier of the two for McCain to beat.

FWIW, I think despite what the polls show, Hillary really is a stronger candidate against McCain, which is why I was hoping she'd lose. Obamamania is in full swing now, but two weeks is a long time in American politics, and there's more than eight months to go. America will have plenty of time to scrutinize Obama, his record, and everything else about him, and what is refreshing about him now will be old and stale by then.
As I noted, James Taranto was thinking along similar lines, and he argued that McCain would be very lucky to have Obama as an opponent.
Obama has not yet quite won the nomination. If buyer's remorse kicks in over the next 12 days--i.e., in time for the Ohio and Texas primaries--Mrs. Clinton may still have a chance. But if Obama has the thing clinched a few weeks from now, there will be plenty of time for disillusion before November. John McCain may be the luckiest politician since . . . well, George W. Bush.
Well, that bit of luck for McCain ran out, didn't it?

Someone please explain to me how the red meat conservatives who hate him and who told Republicans to vote for Hillary have done McCain a favor.

While I should probably be proud my theory about Obama proved to be true, I just wish the McCain haters had left things alone to run their own course.

Considering that some of them plan to vote for Hillary instead of McCain, I guess I shouldn't be surprised by their "help."

Hmmm.. I'm wondering how many of them really thought they were helping McCain. I suspect many of them simply thought Barack Obama would be a worse president than Hillary -- which, to be clear, is not the same strategy at all. (My strategy here is above all to stop Hillary, whose election I think would be the worst thing that could happen to this country. The fact that she's more likely to beat McCain than Obama is an additional, strategic reason to vote against her.)

Anyway, I'd like to offset Hillary's Rush Limbaugh forces here in Pennsylvania, and that brings me back to Tom Maguire's question of whether this election can get any wackier.

For me, it is just about to get wackier in one respect. Maybe surreal is a better word. I have decided to register as a Democrat so I can vote against Hillary Clinton to help thwart Rush Limbaugh's fake false flag, fake Trojan Horse campaign. (Is there such a thing as a Trojan Horse within a Trojan Horse?)

In one fell swoop, I will transform myself from being a hated RINO to being a hated DINO, and thus demonstrate that I can fight a fake false flag with a real false flag!

I realize it's a bit like putting on the enemy's uniform, but what the hell. Rush Limbaugh's minions are already swelling the Democratic voter rolls anyway, so why can't I be an anti-Limbaugh Democrat? I'm sure that Limbaugh's pro-Hillary Democrats would see this as just another example of an out-of-control McCain RINO pretending to be a DINO in order to make trouble. But if there have to be Republican DINOs, I think it's only fair that there should be pro-McCain DINOs as well as anti-McCain DINOs.

Hell, once I change my registration, I'll be legally permitted to call myself a Democrat for McCain.

An hour later, here I am, back from the Registrar of Voters and wackier than ever before.

I thought to take a last picture of me as a Republican before I left, and I took another upon my return, so that readers could see my transformation.

beforeafter.jpg

Note the Falkland Islands ruler I held when I was a Republican (taken at 2:57 p.m.) in contrast to the ordinary ruler I held as a Democrat (at 4:00 p.m.). That's my way of saying that Hillary Clinton is no Margaret Thatcher.

What I can't figure out is my predominant reason for doing what I just did. To fight Hillary? To fight Limbaugh? To help McCain?

And who's to blame for my current plight? (Bear in mind that I didn't want to change my party registration, as I feel more at home in the GOP.)

There are too many ironies for me to process. Am I a McCain Democrat? A anti-Limbaugh Democrat? An anti-Hillary Democrat? A RINO DINO malcontent? I don't know.

For the time being, I'm a Democrat for McCain.

UPDATE: My thanks to Glenn Reynolds for the link and the quote.

Welcome all! I appreciate the comments.

The election is still six weeks away, and by the time it's over, I'll be a battle-hardened Democrat!

MORE: My thanks to Bob Krumm for the link!

posted by Eric on 03.06.08 at 04:43 PM










Comments

More irony: I'm an independent who is conservative to the great liberal ideas of our Founding Fathers expressed in the Declaration of Independence

So, I'll be voting for McCain.

Ronald   ·  March 6, 2008 5:20 PM

All these primary shenanigans is why I don't support open primaries. To vote for a candidate for a party, you should have to be a registered member of that party. If you aren't a member of a party, you get to stay at home on primary polling day and wait until November when the candidates are a settled issue and on the general election ballot.

RandMan   ·  March 6, 2008 5:52 PM

I believe the rationale for voting for HIllary is to keep the Democrats engaged in infighting and attacking each other, while McCain remains above the fray and faces a weakened opponent come November.

Frankly I think we're all screwed no matter what, they're all socialists in one way or another.

Pax   ·  March 6, 2008 7:23 PM

I think you should vote for Mike Gravel . . . ;)

Tommy Jadoo
BowTieRepublican.com

Tommy Jadoo   ·  March 6, 2008 7:56 PM

All the pictures similar to these I've seen lately of Democrats had numbers and an additional profile shot.

joated   ·  March 6, 2008 9:45 PM

The thing to remember about Rush Limbaugh is that he care above all for Rush Limbaugh. He and Hillary are 2 sides of the same divisive, selfish coin.

Rush loves this, because it makes him look important. But more importantly he loves the idea of Hillary being in the White House, because then he can take shots at her for at least 4 years.

Rush never had it so good as when Bill was in office. He's a hater...he trades on hate...and so he needs Hillary.

As for those dumb listeners who actually follow him, I hope they realize they are playing games with our country's future. I agree that a Hillary presidency would be a disaster for this country.

But to Rush and some of his gullible listeners, it's all just a big game. But unlike his listeners, Rush gets richer playing this game.

I used to really like Rush until this episode. Now I wish he would go away.

abc   ·  March 6, 2008 10:47 PM

Limbaugh attained his greatest popularity during the Clinton years. The Bush years have not been good for him. I suspect he would love to have a Clinton back in the White House.

There is also a theory - basically bigtime conspiracy stuff - that Hillary is the preferred candidate of the neocons and the "ruling establishment." One thing I do find compelling about this theory is that Rupert Murdoch sort of threw his support behind Hillary. Anecdotally, it also seems like a lot of right wing talkers spend more time beating up Obama and McCain and ignoring Hillary.

In the end, it's amazing to me that Rush Limbaugh told people to vote for a Clinton and so many Republicans were apparently willing to take their marching orders from him. I have lost a lot of respect for Rush and GOPers in Texas and Ohio.

Chris   ·  March 6, 2008 10:55 PM

I think that you're missing the point. Limbaugh doesn't want people to vote for Hillary so that she will get the nomination. He's doing it to prolong the battle that will bloody both candidates, regardless of who comes out on top. Obama probably is the weaker candidate, but neither of them will be able to beat McCain in the fall, particularly after a very divisive primary, and probably election.

Rand Simberg   ·  March 6, 2008 11:00 PM

I hope every Democrat in your state decides not to get between Limbaugh and anti Limbaugh Republican Democrats, switches their registration to Republican, and writes in Hillary or Obama as the REPUBLICAN candidate.

David Weisman   ·  March 6, 2008 11:06 PM

I cannot stand Hillary at all, and I agree she is likely to be more difficult for McCain to dispatch than Oh-Bah-Muh. But as an American, I frankly find the thought of Obama as president scarier than the thought of Hillary, so I'm hoping she wins the nomination. Obama's demagoguery is too much to take, and just too dangerous to the Republic to take the chance.

Tim   ·  March 6, 2008 11:06 PM

I agree. Hillary is the most D A N G E R O U S. I wanted her out now - but it's too late. Obama can be shredded any time.

Jimmy   ·  March 6, 2008 11:08 PM

All I have to say is this election is so whacky that you may reach the opposite conclusion a month from now and go for the Hildabeast. It's just not possible to be sure of anything but one good lesson from all of this is to vote on election day and don't participate in "early voting". I bet there are a lot of people who regret they did.


See you at the reassessment!

Sam   ·  March 6, 2008 11:08 PM

Limbaugh hates McCain? Do you mean that literally or in the sense the word hate has become synonymous with the word dislike?

If the former, I disagree. I've heard Limbaugh state a number of times that he doesn't hate anyone. I agree with him. Hating someone does more damage to the hater than the person being hated.

I've also heard Limbaugh remark as recently as this week that "McCain is our nominee" and "I want our side to win".

Limbaugh points out Hillary's high negatives and Obama's cult-like following and concludes Hillary to be easier to beat.

Maybe you disagree, but that doesn't mean Limbaugh hates McCain.

Bert   ·  March 6, 2008 11:16 PM

Hmmm. Rush's followers are dumb and gullible. Until "this episode," you were one of Rush's followers. You think this is the worst he's done? This caused you to see the light? I think you're giving yourself way too much credit for rising above those monikers. It's been my general experience that people who think whole groups of people are dumb and gullible fit those categories themselves much better than their targets. When it's easier to call people names, well . . .

rrm   ·  March 6, 2008 11:21 PM

I am of the opinion that a Barack Obama presidency would be the worst possible outcome of the general election that I have taken to rooting for [I] shudders [/I] Hillary Clinton. I'm sorry; she's as heartless and immoral as Bill but he actually believes the crap he's spewing! She has no soul, so I don't doubt that she won't deviate to far from center, lest she lose power. But Barack, like Jimmy Carter, is authentic; he is wholly honest when he says tht he's going to raise our taxes or meet with Iran and Cuba. And that scares me. Besides, I don't believe they can actually give her the nomination now; she is mathematically almost out of it and, here's the kicker, if she is given the nomination because of superdelegate nonsense, Doug Wilder has promised the Black delegates will walk. No Black leadership, no Black get out the vote, no Democratic Party. Period. She can't win.

Josh   ·  March 6, 2008 11:23 PM

In the Democrat photo it looks like someone used Photoshop to darken your skin tones. What's up with that? Unconscious racism?

Paul A'Barge   ·  March 6, 2008 11:38 PM

Rush's followers are dumb and gullible.

Not nearly so dumb and gullible as the folks who buy into this. If it weren't late and I weren't so tired I'd dig up that recent survey of whose audience is the most informed.

Didn't I read somewhere that Pennsylvania didn't allow crossover voting? I think Limbaugh's audience couldn't fool with PA if they wanted to and I also think Rush has done as much as he intended to.

Rush doesn't hate McCain although he surely thinks he's about as bad a candidate as we could've come up with and, of course, Rush wanted a conservative candidate. He definitely wants McCain to win over either of the leftists.

It's looking like McCain will not be able to spend any money until primary season is over, so Rush wanted the primary prolonged so the 2 Dem. candidates could fight each other instead of focusing on McCain (who would be unable and, sadly, unwilling anyway, to fight back).

Beej   ·  March 6, 2008 11:38 PM

I think you are 100% correct and, now that you're a DINO, I wish you could vote twice for Obama.

DRJ   ·  March 6, 2008 11:38 PM

Bert, I think you have joated nailed. I would put him in the seminar blogger category:
He says some complimentary things about the target of interest, and then unloads with both barrels.

Eric, I don't fault you for wondering about Rush's motives. But one superdelegate who lives in my vicinity has been quoted as dreading if this race ends a dead heat, because then the superdelegates really will decide things, and that will lead to the chaos in Denver that Rush seeks, and that I believe is beneficial to our side.

Right now, Mrs. Clinton is trailing, so it makes sense to throw your support to her. But if the roles reverse (and they could), then Obama should get the support of those of us who are pimping our votes. Watch the committed delegate count carefully (and ignore estimates including superdelegates), and plan to vote for the underdog accordingly!

Frank   ·  March 6, 2008 11:47 PM

You should have just spent your time writing this lame blog post solo-sexing it up in front of the mirror considering you didn't even consider or address Rush's arguments.

yarrr   ·  March 6, 2008 11:52 PM

These people trying to sabotage the Democrats are sickening.

That's not what a democracy is all about. And Rush's rationalization about how the Democrats chose McCain is just foolish and only shows how deceptive he can be, because he's not that dumb.

Democrats who crossed over and voted for McCain were doing so because they like the guy; they were giving the Republicans a huge hint and help in giving them a candidate with the type of crossover appeal who can win in a general election. Their votes were not to mess with the GOP nominating process. In fact, where that was suggested, in MI, the candidate that the Dems were told to vote for was Romney, because he was seen as easy to beat.

But to just mess with the other party and try to throw them into chaos...that's not right. And I hope the Dem superdelegates realize this and go overwhelmingly for Obama to send a message.

Maybe Hillary should divorce Bill and marry Rush: they are 2 of a kind...they'd probably enjoy each other's company, with their huge egos, their anger, their hatred.

abc   ·  March 6, 2008 11:58 PM

All Democrats, Dino or not, should support McAmnesty. He has built his career, made himself famous by bashing conservatives and Republicans knowing it's guaranteed to get him page one coverage as "Mr. Maverick".

When the left wants a Republican stooge to sanctify and cosponsor their legislation, they can always count on McAmnesty.

McCain/Edwards, McCain/Lieberman, McCain/ Feingold, McCain/Kennedy etc.

He's been in the Senate for 22 years. Can you name a single piece of conservative legislation with his name on it?

Vote for Juan McAmnesty. He's the best of the three Democrats still running.

Raoul   ·  March 7, 2008 12:07 AM

McCain is a great choice; it would have been far better for the GOP to nominate him in 2000.

If that had happened, he would have won big, there wouldn't have been the FL recount debacle, and he would have managed the war on terror far better.

And oh yeah, we wouldn't have these huge deficits.

It's ironic that Bush took down the GOP and yet was cheered at the conservative convention, while McCain is kind of brushed off.

Frankly, many Republicans do not deserve a nominee as stellar as McCain.

As for Rush, he's really a moron in this case. I still say Rush should marry Hillary: they'd be perfect for each other.

abc   ·  March 7, 2008 12:15 AM

I think Rush is playing a dangerous game, but anybody who says "I used to love Rush" and "Rush is a hater" is an obvious liar. Rush is not a hater, his is a conservative. I will vote for McCain as the least potentially harmful of the three Democrats running, but my choice goes McCain, Obama, Clinton. Hillary would move up if her husband just disappeared, Ozark syle, if you know what I mean.

moptop   ·  March 7, 2008 12:27 AM

If Hillary keeps the momentum, the super delegates will have to go with her.

Blacks will be outraged that BO got shafted and will stay home in November. They may even start to distrust the Democrat party.

That's why freedom loving Pennsylvanian's need to register Democrat and vote Hillary.

Tom   ·  March 7, 2008 12:27 AM

Rush has jumped the shark with this one.

And for all people like Tom, who think this is such a great idea: it's a repulsive idea whether it works or not.

Where's Rush and his saying that we can beat then on ideas? I guess he doesn't believe that.

And it may place Hillary in the White House, which would tear this country apart. Just the idea that anyone would take that chance is disgusting and irresponsible.

Rush is trying to play god, pure and simple.

And I say this as someone who is a lifelong Republican and conservative. Trust me when I say that this sort of thinking will rip the GOP and conservatives apart.

I know many evangelical Christians that are sick and tired of Rush and his politics of hate and are turning him off.

So enjoy your little game while you can. And Rush may find himself with less listeners.

In fact, I urge everyone to boycott Rush and write his sponsors to complain.

abc   ·  March 7, 2008 12:35 AM

Eric,

Coco is a dog.

Coco is dumb.

Coco loves you.

Therefor Coco is a dumb dog for Eric. That, a frisbee, and an open field will give you both hours of fun.

Alan Kellogg   ·  March 7, 2008 12:36 AM

I agree with rrm and Weisman. Obama is playing a game of emotional blackmail; vote for him or else you're racist. His voting record is further left than any of the others. And his personality cult scares the sh!t out of me.

All three of these senators vote alike concerning amnesty for illegals, oil exploration, and the First Amendment; as for judges, the Democrats are going to nominate Ginsburgs and McCain is going to nominate Souters. They are all rotten, but I do know who'll be most effective at the bully pulpit at turning us into a socialist basket-case.

That one would be Obama. Obama must be resisted at every turn. So, whatever your party affiliation, vote for HRC in the primary.

Later on you can all make your choice between Douche and McTurd (I'll turn up to vote down-ticket, but will go Libertarian for the top spot).

David Ross   ·  March 7, 2008 12:45 AM

Relax folks, its politics. Dems play this game all the time and may well have helped put McCain in anyway.

Rush senses that if this thing is close enough Hillary will shoehorn Florida and Michigan back in. This would make McCain's life much easier. If Obama fights too hard to exclude Florida, it will bite him in the general election, and if he doesnt fight hard enough, Hillary will win and look like the politically conniving anything for power candidate that she is, and she will lose.

Those two states could swing this elections before it even gets started, particularly if it all goes to the DNC. 1968 all over again.

I dont feel the least bit bad about this- the chickens are really coming home to roost after the last couple of election shananigans. We will see if the 'every vote counts even if its not a vote and not remotely fair' meme holds strong when it puts Clinton or Obama on the wrong side of an election.

Mark Buehner   ·  March 7, 2008 12:45 AM

Here's the real deal on Rush: this guy is trying to play God...he's on a huge ego trip.

He doesn't care about anyone except himself, and he loves the idea of playing god and getting to bash Hillary more and drive up his ratings.

Someone has to cut Rush down to size, and the only way is for the people to boycott his show and write his advertisers.

The new slogan for the show should be: Rush is repugnant. Maybe "Hillary/Rush 08"...because we all know that Hillary owns Rush, because he needs her to pick on.

abc   ·  March 7, 2008 12:47 AM

Hillary has managed to divide the Democratic party and maybe leave it in ruins.

Rush is now embarking on a path to divide the Republican party and maybe leave it in ruins.

All to further his ego and bank account.

And some people actually buy into it.

Trust me when I tell you that many many Republicans with principles and morals find this tactic to be repugnant. These people will abandon Rush. These people will abandon the GOP if this sort of stuff continues.

Not every Republican or conservative wants to play god or win by messing with the other side.

McCain is already a sign that the GOP is evolving, as is necessary over time. It's stupid to keep trying to go back to Reagan, just like it was stupid for the Democrats to yearn for the return of an FDR for all those years after he was gone.

Times change and we need new leaders, new perspectives.

Take the environment. Rush's stupid views on ignoring the environment are passing away. A generation from now they will be seen as hopelessly ignorant by all.

Then there's immigration. It's stupid to think you can deport 12 million people; some solution must be found. Again, given time, the views of Rush will pass away.

Same as it ever was.

abc   ·  March 7, 2008 12:55 AM

As for Rush: "hate" isn't the word for his feelings about McCain. I've seen them run the gamut from frustration to disdain but "hate" is too strong a word.

And Tom: if those evangelicals would also happen to be Huckabee voters and/or anti-Romney, then Rush doesn't need 'em. Talk about divisive; Huckabee has reset the image of evangelicals among Catholics, Mormons, and secularists to where it was in 1925. Last thing he wants is William Jennings Bryan clones ranting on his airtime, praising Jesus and demanding handouts.

David Ross   ·  March 7, 2008 12:58 AM

By rrm and Weisman, I meant Josh and Tim. (Mistook the footer for a header and vice-a-verse-a.)

David Ross   ·  March 7, 2008 12:59 AM

I think Rand is correct. In fact he probably didn't go far enough in his assessment of what Rush Limbaugh would like to see happen;which is the complete implosion of the Democrats.Not just that,I think he wants the country to see how far left these folks are. Which is not where the majority of the country is,even most Democrats.

Just look at the NAFTA mess,neither Hillary or Obama could stop themselves from trying to out "left" the other. To the point of embarassing,and basically calling Canada a third world country.

So,now there will be no winner before the Democrats convention.And every Democrat special interest group,and special entitlement group will pick their candidate,and try to tear the other guys throat out.It won't be pretty,but it is the ultimate end of where the Democrats have been going for so long.And it will cause a blowout in the General-for McCain.

Hopefully in the end,some adults in the Democrat party will pick up the pieces and put a rational party back together.

flicka47   ·  March 7, 2008 1:04 AM

I crossed over and voted for HRC Tuesday in Toledo. I made that decision prior to Limbaugh advancing the idea (indeed, I couldn't get through on his 800# to state my case). Which is: the more time HRC and BHO have to throw dirt at each other, the better JSM will look in the Fall. Yes, Obama may be the weaker candidate. But HRC maintains her 50% negative rating and will see it go higher if she bloodies BHO and body checks him out of the arena. Do you think all these young Obamaniacs are gonna vote for HRC in November after "the same old politics" "steals" the nomination via Superdelegates and some sort of MI, FL flim flam? And how about Black voters? Think they'll rush to vote for HRC after she disembowels Obama with dirty tricks and the smoke filled room stuff? HRC is a junkyard dog. She'll muscle the nomination from Obama but will remind everyone of just how nasty she and Bill were in the 90's.

RonT   ·  March 7, 2008 1:24 AM

If Clinton goes into the convention with a string of wins but still second in pledges candidates, she's got an argument for and a shot at the nomination. Do you doubt that she'll press it?

However, if those wins are loudly claimed as the result of Rush Limbaugh's minions doing his bidding, her argument is weaker, no?

But not so weak that Obama can trust that he can seat the Michigan and Florida delegations and still win the nomination.

Which means, we wind up with a Democratic nominee either explicitly weakened in Florida, or who stole with superdelegates the nomination from the person who won the most pledged delegates.

Hey, maybe we can get the activists in Denver to out-and-out riot.

Lunatic   ·  March 7, 2008 1:39 AM

Well, let's get the minor stuff out of the way: McCain is not the "officially, formally recognized candidate", he is at the moment informally recognized and not official at all, or what literate people used to call the "presumptive" candidate.

Anyone who thinks that Limbaugh is secretly, perhaps subconsciously, wishing for Clinton to defeat McCain is simply incapable of listening. Limbaugh didn't have a candidate this year, and among the choices he does not prefer another Republican to McCain. Limbaugh was very clear about his objective -- he wants to create as much disruption as possible among the Democrats, given that there's no longer any reason to vote in Republican primaries. It would not surprise me in the slightest to hear him exhort his listeners to vote for Obama in Pennsylvania. Try opening your ears, you might learn something.

Pink Pig   ·  March 7, 2008 1:56 AM

I think it's silly to think this is some sort of Rush plot against McCain. Is McCain Rush's ideal candidate? Of course not. Is he better than Hillary or Obama? Certainly. As noted several times above, he just wants to see the Dems bloody each other, and since Hillary is behind by most measures, he urges Republicans vote for her to keep her in the race. I'm sure if Obama were behind, Rush would be urging people to vote for him.

It's interesting that much of the disagreement here is about whether Obama or Hillary is the weakest opponent, and which would make the worst president....

PapayaSF   ·  March 7, 2008 2:06 AM

There is a lot of time between now and the PA primary. Rush may decide that it is in the Repubs best interest to sit this one out (as I do) or he may think it is best to urge crossovers for Obama because Hillary may win big there.
Either way, the two finalists for the donkey nomination have way too much in common. There is no difference policy-wise between them. That is why this has dragged out for so long, and not because of anything Rush advocated.

Elroy Jetson   ·  March 7, 2008 2:40 AM

I'd vote for Rush over all three of these statists.

MlR   ·  March 7, 2008 3:06 AM

*AND George Bush, for that matter.

MlR   ·  March 7, 2008 3:08 AM

Some of the commenters here are obvious fans of Limbaugh and yet they try to act superior. Can't do both folks, he's sophomoric.

To the matter at hand, McCain WILL NOT beat Clinton. Therefore she must be prevented from getting the nomination. I live in PA. I've never voted in a primary in my life but I'll vote in this one.

rubberhead   ·  March 7, 2008 6:58 AM

Jeebus - is there anything lamer than whining about Rush Limbaugh? You Ladies need to get your head in the game.

1) A drawn-out, down-and-dirty Democratic nomination fight is ALWAYS a good thing. I'm hoping for a 1968 type Democratic Convention in Denver this year. Keeping Hillary viable till then is tactically shrewd.

2) Many, including me and the current polls, think Hillary is more beatable, though I don't really think a McCain Presidency is a 'Win' for conservatives.

Barbula   ·  March 7, 2008 7:52 AM

Limbaugh has said repeatedly he's doing this because he thinks the democrats cross-voted into the republican primaries making mccain the nominee. He also knows he's screwed no matter who wins, mccain and both democrats will move to silence talk radio, his career is over.

Anonymous   ·  March 7, 2008 9:10 AM

I don't like Rush, don't listen to Rush, don't care about Rush.

I really don't like socialism, I really don't like the current socialist Democrat party.

Anything liberty loving Americans can do to disrupt the confused mob that is the Democrat party is a good thing.

Vote Hillary and vote often. Give her the mo she needs to work her diabolical deeds on Obama and deprive him of the nomination and destroy the Democrats for another generation.

Tom   ·  March 7, 2008 9:12 AM

"...here's the kicker, if she is given the nomination because of superdelegate nonsense, Doug Wilder has promised the Black delegates will walk."

Is that Ambassador Doug Wilder or Secretary of State Doug Wilder or Vice President Doug Wilder?

As long as Clinton is in the race she is going to try to do whatever it takes to win. I think it's a mistake for Republicans to assume that they can help her just enough to foil Obama without also helping her to become President.

Jonathan   ·  March 7, 2008 10:31 AM

You all can certainly disagree with Rush, but why must you do so by first attributing something to him that is not true and then attacking him for something he has not done. This is the "straw man" approach and is more indicative of brain dead liberals than open minded and thoughtful people.

Rush's reasoning is simple. If Hillary remains in the Democratic race, the Dems will be split for while longer. That will be good for Republicans. Why is that so hard to understand by a group who thinks of themselves as proponents of "classical values?"

Machiavelli recognized that when your opponents are fighting among themselves, you have an advantage you can exploit. If you want McCain to win in November, you should applaud Rush.

Rush clearly does not celebrate McCain's victory in the primaries and would prefer that someone more like Fred Thompson had been the nominee. But now that it is final that McCain is the nominee, Rush wants McCain to win just as much as you all do.

Flash Gordon   ·  March 7, 2008 10:50 AM

Jonathan,

No one is trying to help Hillary become president. They are trying to help her to become the Democrat nominee in order to help McCain become president.

We could have a long discussion about this strategy.

Rush's strategy may be wrong. And yours may be wrong. But even if we disagree on how to get it, in the end we all want the same thing.

Flash Gordon   ·  March 7, 2008 10:56 AM

Tom,

You don't like Rush. Well, that's OK, because you clearly agree with him and that's what matters.

Flash Gordon   ·  March 7, 2008 11:00 AM

To those who think it would be best to aid Hillary in getting the nomination and then rely on her unpopularity to defeat her in the general: Remember when George W. Bush signed campaign finance reform into law, in spite of thinking it unconstitutional on the merits, because he believed the courts would strike it down? Hillary will not be defeated until she is defeated. Until then, she's the winner. We have no basis upon which to assume she'll be defeated in a general election, and any assumption to the contrary is just that--an assumption. As she herself said, be careful what you wish for. While Dem hi-jinks may be fun to watch, it would be better to drive a stake through her heart at the earliest opportunity than to toy with her. The Clintons resist being toyed with. Rush either thinks she will certainly lose in the general or he thinks her victory wouldn't be that bad. Either way, he's being stupid--and whatever else you may think of him, he's not usually stupid.

I believe that if she wins the nomination, she will win the general. And I believe with all my heart that we cannot begin to imagine how bad that will be for this country. I may turn out to be wrong, but that's what I think anyhow. And Obama would be far easier to defeat in the general than she would be.

As to the wisdom and/or morality of cross-over voting in primary elections: I'm reminded of when I moved to east Texas from Southwestern Pennsylvania. I'd live all my life in the north and didn't understand the workings of the then-Solid South. A good friend of mine in Houston told me that the only way for a conservative or Republican to have any say over who won any election was to vote in the Democrat primary, because the Democrat candidate would definitely win in the general. In other words, these crossover tactics and strategies have been around for a long time, irrespective of varying motives. There's nothing particularly wrong with them, and I don't think we want to make them illegal or impossible. They're part of political combat, and can be very useful. Why should we disarm ourselves in any way?

betsybounds   ·  March 7, 2008 11:06 AM

The worst possible outcome in this is for H. Clinton to wind up in the White House. If you don't know that, you don't know much.

Voting for her in any venue, under any circumstances, does not contribute to her defeat.

rubberhead   ·  March 7, 2008 11:07 AM

Anonymous,

You may be right that no matter who wins this election they will try to reinstate the fairness doctrine and kill conservative talk radio.

But don't celebrate this too much because you think it will hurt people you don't like, such as Rush. It won't hurt Rush. He has made his millions and can retire to a nice life. As can many other talk radio hosts.

It is you and I that will be hurt. We the listeners will have lost an important voice in opposition to the nonsense and foul deeds that politicians and bureaucrats of all stripes try to foist upon us.

You might also try to remember that if they are successful in killing talk radio, they won't stop there. Troublesome internet blogs could easily be their next target.

Flash Gordon   ·  March 7, 2008 11:09 AM

betsybounds and rubberhead (where do you people get these handles?) make good points.

But think about this. Obama would not be any better than Hillary, at least that is the basis of the strategy to help Hillary stay in the Dem primary.

It is believed, not without reason, that Hillary would be easier for McCain to beat because:

--McCain will not attack Obama, that is unless someone hypnotizes McCain and gets him to think Obama is a conservative.

--If Hillary stays in she will attack Obama. So at least some of the dirt on Obama will get out just in case he ends up being the Dem nominee.

--If Hillary ends up the nominee that is also good because, remember McCain will not attack Hillary any more than Obama. He knows she is not a conservative and even hypnosis will not fool him.

--But even though we can't rely on McCain to actually run a campaign against Hillary (he said he thinks Hillary would make a good president, remember?), much of the dirt about her is already known. Her negatives are high. Half the country already hates her guts.

--If Hillary is the nominee she will attack Obama ruthlessly and, along the way, alienating the Black vote. She cannot win without the Black vote. If she loses it because she pulled shenanigans to defeat Obama, well she is now the weaker candidate allowing McCain to win even though he would otherwise be a pretty weak candidate himself.

You don't have to agree. Like all strategies, it could be wrong. No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy. But, do you have something better?

Flash Gordon   ·  March 7, 2008 11:24 AM

Flash Gordon,

Just sit quietly and take a good long look at McCain. I'm not talking about his record or his policies. I mean look at the man physically. He's too old.

He might beat Obama because it's impossible to get an accurate read on how much of a factor racism would be in that case.

But he will not beat Clinton and I don't think it would even be close. If you don't understand that, what can I tell you?

Rubberhead   ·  March 7, 2008 12:21 PM

"Some of the commenters here are obvious fans of Limbaugh and yet they try to act superior. Can't do both folks, he's sophomoric."

This is actually an argument? On THIS thread, where people compete to prove their superiority over the unwashed masses who like the guy?

He's the only one of the five who actually believes in limited government.

MlR   ·  March 7, 2008 12:32 PM

I got you one beat, friend. Ever since I moved to FL in 2003 I have been a registered Dem. Didn't stop me from volunteering for Bush in '04 or Harris in '06. But I did get to be disenfranchised in '08 when I voted for the Messiah.

Who knows, maybe I will get to switch to the Monster if the Screamer gets his way.

kingronjo   ·  March 7, 2008 1:16 PM

MIR, BS. Rush doesn't believe in limited government. He believes quite happily in government intervention in people's private lives, just not in the economy.

Ergo, he's just as much a statist as these other fools.

Cal   ·  March 7, 2008 3:44 PM

Thank you. You're doing your country right by voting for Obama. And for all the right reasons.

Thanks again.

rob sama   ·  March 7, 2008 9:00 PM

Unless you're a straight anarchist, so do you.

Compared to Clinton, Obama, McCain, and Bush, however, he is a limited government guy.

MlR   ·  March 7, 2008 9:01 PM

People thinking of voting for Hillary:

Hillary is an ardent, die-hard socialist that will deliberately institute programs targeted to dismantle free market capitalism.

Obama is an empty suit boob who is unlikely to accomplish any of his pie in the sky ideas. He's Carter 2.0 (He even has the same advisors)

If you enable Hillary you will likely get her. VOTE FOR OBAMA. If HWMNBMN manages to win it means GOP comeback by 2010 and GOP Whitehouse by 2012.

Mark   ·  March 7, 2008 11:51 PM

This race was Obama's to screw up and he's finally showing signs of doing it. His advisors are amateurs, 2 have quit over sheer stupidity, his loudmouth wife, the canadian/nafta mess was scary stupid, louis farrakan, his chicago problems. Limbaugh may have had very little to do with last tuesday.
With 8 years of bush destroying conservatism in the republican party and after he and others defeated the amnesty bill, the guy they had to defeat gets the nomination of his party. I think thats killing him. His 80% hillary presidency prediction is no joke. For him, it's all going in the wrong direction big time.

Anonymous   ·  March 8, 2008 8:42 AM

I'm glad Hillary is still in the race, as it stands now 50% of the country abhors her and if she defeats Obama that % will increase giving advantage to McCain.

Secondly, ever take into consideration what the progressive Leftist's response will be should McCain "the old white man who is an extension of the McHCimpneoconhitlernazi and that evil rethuglian regime" defeat Obama "the Messiah chosen to save America's soul from McChimpneoconhitlernazi and the evil rethuglian regime"?

For crying out loud, they're still enraged by the false idea that Bush stole the election from Gore in 2000!

I'd rather have Hillary be the object of the progessive Left's rage, perhaps it will help to clarify to those moderates/independents who still have no idea just how vicious is the progressive Left within the Democrat Party.

Personally I'm voting for the troops and their mission; their sacrifices are enough to get me to the voter booth on election day to pull the lever for McCain.

syn   ·  March 8, 2008 10:03 AM

"A good friend of mine in Houston told me that the only way for a conservative or Republican to have any say over who won any election was to vote in the Democrat primary, because the Democrat candidate would definitely win in the general. In other words, these crossover tactics and strategies have been around for a long time, irrespective of varying motives. There's nothing particularly wrong with them, and I don't think we want to make them illegal or impossible. They're part of political combat, and can be very useful. Why should we disarm ourselves in any way?"

It can go deeper than that. My dad has been a registered Democrat in Kentucky for 50+ years, because for decades Democrats won almost all state offices. He gave money to Democrats for that very reason.

But a more Republican man you will never find. And he always votes Republican in the general election.

Since he's registered Dem, he's not even "crossing over" during the primaries.

Chester White   ·  March 8, 2008 10:54 AM

I would recognize those sinister eyes in ANY party.

Iremain unregistered between the stupids and the traitors.

TomJW   ·  March 10, 2008 12:01 PM

Post a comment


April 2011
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail



Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives



Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits