Oh Goody, I Get To Boo McCain

Via Michelle Malkin, John McCain is going to be at CPAC right after February 5th. As are many, I'll be blogging from there, as well.

I don't know as I will actually boo McCain. I will likely opt to treat him with more respect than he has shown conservatives over the years.

But then, that depends on the atmosphere in the room, as well as what he says and does in the few days just ahead.

Comments

[seekeronos]

I would boo him in a New York minute.

[Roy Mustang]

Anyone voting for Obama out of spite for his fellow Republicans can not take the high road. Go ahead and boo him, Dan. It'll make you feel better.

[IslamoLlama]

"I don't know as I will actually boo McCain. I will likely opt to treat him with more respect than he has shown conservatives over the years."

Just don't wear a pro-Romney t-shirt or security might be forced to escort you from the building.

[Roy Mustang]

Nah, only a certain small subset of Romney/Obama supporters like to throw people out for thinking slightly differently than them.

[Roy Mustang]

In any case, I do hope Dan's subset within the Very Conservative class do jump ship.

We'll ostracize these Disloyal and non-Issues based Conservatives (DICs) just like we ostracized Buchanan’s paleocons. If you are not willining help the conservative cause (pro-life, pro-strong defense, pro-small government) then get out of the way for the people who are.

[Gekkobear]

Boo him? Naah, that's tacky.

Walk out as he starts talking? Now I'd do that.

I can't imagine he has anything useful that would change my mind, so why waste time listening to him?

Unless he plans on explaining again how his McCain-Feingold doesn't "abridge free speech" in clear violation of the First Amendment, or how violating his oath to defend and uphold the Constitution is ok (because oath-breakers are cool I think); he isn't going to be able to bridge the gap he's created.

I guess his personal whim is still more important than both his oath, and the Constitution... so I'm going to stick with what I said when CFR passed. "I'll never vote for McCain again; not for dog catcher, much less higher office."

He's going to have to change his position before I change mine.

[Roy Mustang]

Did you donate the max $4600 to your candidate, Gekkobear?

[seekeronos]

"--- We'll ostracize these Disloyal and non-Issues based Conservatives (DICs) just like we ostracized Buchanan’s paleocons. ---"

We "paleos" are still around actually, and are active in the GOP in various ways. In fact, we do compromise when we think we can get our 75% worth. :)

Don't always go by labels either... because by your seeming Rockefeller/RINO definition, my not-so-Buchanesque views would be paleo by comparison.

There are those of us who would rather see the GOP get the pimp-slapping it needs to set it back on course. If that means staying home during the Obama-McCain landslide, then so be it.

[seekeronos]

Correction on that:

If it means going to the polls and voting for the rest of the true conservatives on the GOP ticket, and non-selecting the RINOs, THEN so be it.

Can't neglect the good or better conservative men and women just because a few rascally RINOs want to swing the party over to the Socialists.

[Gekkobear]

I didn't have a candidate Roy... I was still weighing options and the ones I was looking seriously at kept dropping out.

You know, I'd get together with some like-minded people (freedom of association) and run some ads trying to persuade other voters on my issues (freedom of speech) but that would be illegal... because making your political views publicly known near an election is against the law. Only approved and sanctioned public political speakers and approved media sources are allowed to have political opinions. My rights to speech end at pornography and swearing.

When did Conservative politics become interested in protecting the incumbency of candidates by making it harder to get name recognition, when was it necessary to restrict the flow of ideas, especially ideas about politics, especially near elections? I mean, I watched it happen, but I didn't realize things had shifted this much.

Maybe I misunderstood how this First Amendment was supposed to work. I didn't realize that it wasn't meant to apply to political speech. Did the founders also have the 2nd amendment just for duck hunting?

I guess I'm just "Very Conservative". If open-borders, ignoring the Constitution, abridging free speech, taxes designed to "punish" the rich (read McCain's reasoning in 2003 for not supporting the tax cuts, it wasn't spending, but failing to hurt the rich that decided him against, aka. class warfare), Energy Policies set for CO2 reduction for environmental fanatics, and release of terrorists into the U.S. Court system is the "Conservative view" then I can't disagree that I'm to the right of that.

Oddly, this is what we used to call "middle of the road conservative", but we used to call where you're at "responsible democrat". I guess the posts have moved on me again.