Lawrence Welk Delivers Victory Speech In Florida

If McCain channeled anyone when he spoke tonight, it wasn't Ronald Reagan. It was Lawrence Welk. What an unmitigated disaster this guy would be in November. At one point he spoke of Florida watching over his family on an extended tour. I assume he meant his time as a POW. It might have been nice if he had looked after his first wife when he returned, instead of dumping her on the side of the road.

While it's prudent to never say never, as things stand, if McCain gets the nomination, I would work towards his defeat in November before I'd vote for him. The party out of power tends to pick up seats in an off-year election. I do not believe America will embrace a Leftist agenda in the White House. So, either way, we get a liberal in the White House come November with hoped for checks by the Congress.

The best thing for the future of conservatism in America, would be a McCain loss in the general. And we need to start tearing the Republican Party apart and re-building, from the ground up.

They will tell you conservatism is out of vogue. That is false. Otherwise, Fred Thompson would not have sky-rocketed to the top before he even entered the race. What conservatism lacks right now is leadership. John McCain cannot provide it. Mitt Romney can. But if Romney doesn't still win it, and he can, it will be time to re-build and not surrender.

Comments

[Roy Mustang]

Well, by your rational, wouldn't a liberal RINO President McCain destroy the US just as much as liberal President Hillary? And wouldn't this move everyone towards the "real" super duper Romney conservatives?

You sound like you've never backed a losing horse before. Grow up. The issues are more important than the men.

[Dan Riehl]

"The issues are more important"

That's precisely the point, Roy. And they are more important than any party, too. The Republicans seem to have forgotten that, much to their detriment, I'm afraid.

[Dan]

Probably have never agreed with you more than on these last three posts.

[centralcal]

I whole heartedly agree with you tonight, though not always.

McCain is the worst choice of the worst choices.

[seekeronos]

/agree.

Reagan had the faith and the vision to work with the Rockefeller RiNOs when they were right (that is, voting conservative) but moreover, to work bring the conservative voice to leadership in the GOP.

We got too big for our britches under the Bush/Cheney/Rove dynamic (who were painted as conservative, but IMHO are not true conservatives)... and as the cycle of correction works itself out, the errors of Bush/Cheney will be countered by Hillary or Obama, should we fail to unite under proper conservative.

And sorry to the McCainiacs... but Johnny Mac is not that conservative.

[Roy Mustang]

Will President McCain withdraw in defeat from Iraq?

Will he repeal the Bush tax cuts when he has called and voted for its extension?

Will he nominate judicial activists when he has voted to confirm Thomas, Alito, Bork and Roberts? (BTW, unless you think there are only 3 non-RINOs in the Senate don't even mention Ginsburg)

Will he take the veto pen on big government pork?

Besides giving amnesty to the illegal criminals, what would a President McCain do that would be against your conservative beliefs?

Yes, an 83% lifetime ACU rating is conservative. I don't know what you're smoking.

[Terry Gain]

Roy

A 72 year old hasn't a prayer of beating the young black charismatic messiah. Obama need only continue to articulate platitudes - something at which he excels-and his success is assured. And the Dem establishment and the MSM know it.

Conservatives will not support a "close Gitmo - open borders" candidate. The fate of McCain-Kennedy proved that. They might show up to vote against Hillary but they will stay home if Obama is the candidate- and I predict he will be as Hillary can't stand the heat of the kitchen.

[Roy Mustang]

Real conservatives care more about winning Iraq and Afghanistan. We only support Gitmo because we think it helps in the WOT. It is only as a means to an end.

[Roy Mustang]

In point of fact, both Gimto and the issue of tortue, are not the Golden Calves as some "conservatives" try to present them to be. They are only the means to an end.

[docweasel]

Well jeez, don't go all sore loserman yet. The xenophobes may pull it out yet and nominate Romney so Republicans can go down in flames of glory.

Really, there's not a hair-bit of difference in McCain and Bush, and I like Bush fine, except his big government spending. McCain is solid on SCOTUS and judges, that's all that really matters in a president.

Its pretty silly to see "real conservatives" saying they'd rather see a President Hillary than McCain, and have her naming SCOTUS members that will stand for decades.

[seekeronos]

But the use of Gitmo in its current capacity was a creation of neocon Bush.

As POTUS, McCain would be able to, and most likely will close it down and give the captives there the protections of a timely jury trial to avowed enemy combatants against this Republic, much less cease the very effective, aggressive interrogation techniques currently in use.

And RiNO Mac has a 2006 ACU rating of 65%. His lifetime rating may not reflect his current activities very well at all.

[LOL]

rofl this is good stuff.

I wonder guys. Who would you rather vote for if you only had these choices: Huckabee or McCain? Or if that's too hard for you, just tell me which one you hate more--it's all you seem to care about anyways.

[Philip McDaniel]

The fact of the matter is the greatest threat to the Republic is a Democrat winning the presidency. Whether you are a hard right conservative, middle of the road conservative or liberal conservative you had better take a close look at the Democratic Party and its beliefs: European Socialism is staring you in the face and if you do nothing about it you will get exactly what you deserve.

[Fred Beloit]

LOL, don't you have a job? What are you doing up at this hour. If you aren't sharp at work, you might be fired. If you are fired, you won't be able to pay for my health care insurance. Common now. Get with it. Hillery has plans for your salary. And they don't include your keeping much of it.

[Lisa]

Coffee came out of my nose when I read the header "Lawrence Welk Delivers Victory Speech" Please give us some warning before you use your wit like that. Let me a least put the cup down first!

[Terry]

"The fact of the matter is the greatest threat to the Republic is a Democrat winning the presidency."

As far as I'm concerned, Philip has encapsulated in this single sentence the reason to pull up one's socks, put the rancor of defeat behind, and come together for the greater good of the country.

[Drex Davis]

Dan,
You are right on. We were told that if we didn't elect George Bush that the country would go to pot . . . Well, maybe it's going to pot a little more slowly, but it's going to pot. "Our" party has been pulled to the left, toward BIG GOVERNMENT. It's time for conservatives to sit out elections if there isn't a conservative to vote for.

You are exactly right. It's time to let the party go so that it never wins again with the phony "but if you don't elect me you'll get worse" argument.

Just remember your feelings today when the arguments start coming about "but the supreme court . . . " or "but surrender in the war . . ."

A couple decades of leftist wrecking just might be the costs of saving conservatism in the long run. But at the rate the GOP is going leftist wrecking is going to happen anyway, just with the complicit support of Conservatives who are frightened into voting for liberal republicans.

Don't be fooled by the appellation "Republican" next to McCain's name. He hasn't been one for some time.

I'm not sure I'll be actively campaigning against him, but I won't be campaigning for him. And if he loses, I will count it success for Conservatives.

[JEB]

Seekeronos: "We got too big for our britches under the Bush/Cheney/Rove dynamic (who were painted as conservative, but IMHO are not true conservatives)... "

Of course they were REAL American conservatives-(Bush/Cheney/Rove) -those gentlemen governed with the support of the hard Republican right-wing (a "majority of a majority" to quote Tom DeLay) and followed generally right-wing policies while in office..The only reason that so-called 'conservatives' say that: " IMHO are not true conservatives" TODAY is that these guys have proven to be total failures at every level in governing the US and making policy...The public knows this very well..thats why the Republican party is under-going a serious decline of support (in corporate cash, individual contributions, and party identification in the general population)...

So-called American 'conservatives' are really not well suited to governing in general-- or as we have seen in Iraq and the "War on Terror" making effective national strategy or military/diplomatic policy. Their ideology tends to get in the way, they are not really well-motivated to make government work, and are all too ready to give away taxpayer cash with no accountability to politically protected contractors...

Seekeronos: "And sorry to the McCainiacs... but Johnny Mac is not that conservative."

Yeah, but he is the one you ended up with down by the river eating the grass with the few remaining RINOs...Enjoy the wildlife while on the Kenya safari....!! The natives are restless..!!!

[Brad S]

OK, Dan, time to be honest: You WANT McCain and the GOP to LOSE so you can position yourself to throw mudballs at Hillary/Obama 24/7/365. You saw how much fun Markos Moulitsas and Keith Olbermann are having, and you want some of that.

With you, this isn't about upholding "conservative principles:" It's about using those same principles to get you a better media gig. Too bad those silly folks that comprise the GOP "base" prefer to win rather than enable your media desires.

[seekeronos]

Good grief. Some of y'all sound like Johnny Mac is all but inevitable.

Let's hold on to those claims of bulletproof inevitablity until after Tsunami Tuesday.

Those claims have a way of deep-sixing candidates thus far. Just ask Rudy G. or Hillary or even as recently as the Huckabust.

This primary isn't over yet.

[seekeronos]

To JEB:

Bush/Cheney/ROve et. al were not fully conservative. They were neoconservatives, or more specifically, strongly influenced by the neocon movement. Most (but not all) neocons were folks that had "converted" over from certain strains of liberalism in the 1960s-80s who saw value in interventionism, aggressive manipulations of the economy, and played the evangelical crowd like a fiddle in hopes of cementing a larger, bigger tent base.

And it worked. My point is, that many in the establishment of the GOP grew fat, dumb, and happy with that brand of conservatism, and we are setting ourselves up for a nasty fall come November - McCain represents at best a mingling of Bush and the ugliness of Ted Kennedy.

[JEB]

"This primary isn't over yet."

It could end in a brokered Republo convention...That would be real good ..Willard 'Mitt' Romney as the establishment brokered nominee and bad feelings all around...McCain will say he was robbed...Plus 'Romnay' polls so weakly in general election matchups now...

Can you say "Down in Flames" in the Fall...??

Could be way worse than the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain...

And with 28 or so incumboo Republo Congress-critters leaving that situation doesn't look good on the Hill neither....

[seekeronos]

A brokered convention could be a very good thing or a very bad thing... personally, I wouldn't mind seeing one in my lifetime.

I'd bet some rather interesting things could happen.

[JEB]

"Bush/Cheney/ROve et. al were not fully conservative. They were neoconservatives, or more specifically, strongly influenced by the neocon movement"....

This is simply NOT true at the most basic level...Of the three men Only Cheney was somewhat influenced by the neo-cons before taking office....the neocon movement was (and still is to some extent) a cabal of insiders organized in the main around foreign policy issues...The interesting part is how these neocons influenced the entire right-wing media & the Republican party into pushing their wacked out points of view and and failing policies--Their insanity became the new orthodoxy among conservo Republicans--even today after the crackup of the neo-con word vision so-called 'conservatives' particularly officeholders & media figures still mouth all the neo-con bromides.

You can't somehow decouple to suit your case the neo-cons from modern day Republican conservatives ---the two are closely linked--and one has still not repudiated the other....

[seekeronos]

I can decouple my particular suitcase rather easily... it's just not in line with what most of the base still supports.

Here's my take on the neocon "bromide"...

Technically, the war and subsequent military occupation of Iraq and A'stan are unconstitutional: the POTUS never asked the Congress for a declaration of war. It is all based upon a few resolutions and some slick manueverings which made a few oof the key players exceedingly more wealthy than they already were (to include Hillary and some other top Dems as well as the big bad neocons).

But, I won't be inclined to raise a big ruction over it since it accomplishes a bigger goal of containing Jihad and pushing down local pockets of terrorists.

There could have been better ways to have spent that $1.5T dumped into those sandboxes, such locking down our own bordersm and embarking on a Apollo/NASA-scale program to build up our nuclear and clean coal and drill the ANWR and make a bunch of smart scientists with high foreheads and thick eyeglasses really wealthy to figure out how to make cars run on water (or whatever real technology is out there for performing energy transfer via solar energy concentration and hydrolysis).

But that's not where the chips lay now.

The main thing for us to do is to either get this party out of the hands of the socialist puppetmasters like Soros and his crew, and get it back to its bedrock principles...

...or leave the the dead elephant carcass where it lies.

[JEB]

"Technically, the war and subsequent military occupation of Iraq and A'stan are unconstitutional: the POTUS never asked the Congress for a declaration of war. It is all based upon a few resolutions and some slick manueverings which made a few oof the key players exceedingly more wealthy".....

Wellll...Thats also a 'slick' way to get the Republican elephant and so-called mainstream conservatives off the hook for the Iraq War. To this day by and large 'conservative' Republican officeholders support the off the rails Iraq War, and try to use it for political advantage (remember 'defeatocrats'in 2006) despite two-thirds of the American public turning against the war (a much higher % than at any point in the Vietnam conflict).

In fact, for international legal reasons (and for insurance/economic reasons in 2001), war has not been declared by the USA since 1941---nation-states these days only in very rare (& somewhat minor) cases issue such traditional declarations of war---Being overly concerned with such issues is really a mark of living in a long gone & dead day of some 65 to 100 years ago...but thats the number of the beast of the post-modern throwback 'conservative' movement of this time and place...66 years ago to 1941 when FDR was prezidnut and Churchill was America's hero...Its no wonder that they have been unable to govern effectively, or even properly conduct military strategy in their 'war on terra' given such a worldview...

[JEB]

The Out of Touch Republo Right-wing Media Elites/bloggers in Action:

'When the Wall Street Journal reports that Republicans are in danger of losing support in the Florida Panhandle, you know trouble is brewing for the GOP. How the World Works spent its high school years in northern Florida, and the Panhandle is as rock-ribbed a slice of conservative deep South as you will find in either adjoining Alabama or Mississippi. '

"A toxic brew of economic anxiety, a deepening housing slump, skyrocketing home insurance, strained schools and the lingering effects of recent hurricanes have spawned a gloomy mood in Florida," writes the Journal's Corey Dade.

'But do Republican opinion-makers understand this? Watching the bloggers at the National Review's "The Corner" during Wednesday's Republican debate, you couldn't ignore the feeling that the right-wing elite simply don't understand the mess they're in, or why Senator John McCain has been winning primaries. '

'Witness one representative comment: '

Yeah, Senator, That's the Problem [Andy McCarthy]

McCain: "There are some greedy people on Wall Street who need to be punished."

Is he our guy, or what?

'Trust me, the sarcasm there is so thick you couldn't push through it in a turbo-powered Humvee. '

'For the despairing folks at the National Review, McCain's threat to punish the greedy is proof of his GOP-values-betraying pro-big government proclivities. But to anyone paying attention to what's going on in the United States at the moment, it might just seem like exactly the message voters want to hear. '

'And it's not even pandering! It's the truth. And if McCain keeps it up, he's going to be a formidable opponent for whoever the Democrats nominate.'

(The above was provided from Salon's 'How the World Works' section)

[JEB]

Gov. Huckadoom weighs in on Mitt Romnay the National Review's: 'conservative alternative'

"Well, Mitt's always trying to be something. Right now, he's trying to be the conservative alternative."

"Mitt's just trying to be a conservative, because he's really having to overcome a lifetime of being pro-abortion, of being pro-same-sex relationships, about being against the Second Amendment and for gun control, about being for $700 million in increases in taxes, and then saying he didn't ever raise taxes, but he called them fees.

"Mitt's reinvented himself so many different times. And, you know, it's absurd to me when he says that maybe I ought to drop out of the race.

"You know, Norah, my perspective is here's a guy with an MBA from Harvard who ought to know something about a business model. And when you spend as much money as he has, and he has basically the same market share that I have, if this were a business decision, Mitt would be shutting his operation down, terminating those employees, and giving them a pink slip, and saying, 'Huckabee's got a more efficient operation. We ought to follow him, because he's getting the job done with a whole lot less overhead.'"

[JEB]

"Good grief. Some of y'all sound like Johnny Mac is all but inevitable."

Sorry, he is inevitable NOW....

Put him side by side with Obama--what would you have in the White House ??--a self-made bright young man---or a cranky old geezer who wants to stay in Iraq for a 100 years...

If I were in the military I'd know in a New York minute who to vote for...

[JEB]

One of our right-wing seers says about the Iraq War---

"But, I won't be inclined to raise a big ruction over it since it accomplishes a bigger goal of containing Jihad and pushing down local pockets of terrorists"

But there weren't really many anti-US terrorists in Iraq when Bush invaded--and the invasion created a whole lot more of them.

Actually by any national strategy measure the invasion of a Iraq was a giant strategic mis-step for America--a trillion dollar war, over 35,000 US killed and wounded and counting, our ground and other military forces worn down by endless deployments, our prestige and influence in the dumper around the world. We sent our guys into Iraq without enough troops, without much of a plan--and it was downhill from there in a very badly managed Rummie DoD war....And what did the US get from all that ??--an opportunity to play endless policemen in a set of Mid-east sectarian wars tween Muslims--what a great deal GW Bush !!

But if you ask the typical right-winger, even today if they are still AOK with the war you get either a rara response or the tepid so-so endorsement noted above at the top of this post---Its as if the last five years never happened---Its going to be fun watching Mc Cain defend the whole Bush Mid-east adventure in the Fall