AmeriCAN-DO Attitude

Are you an AmeriCAN or an AmeriCAN'T?

Reagan: Don’t Give Up Your Ideals, Don’t Compromise, Don’t Turn to Expediency

I expect McCainservatives, after reading these quotes, to dump on Ronald Reagan for saying we must not give up on our ideals, not compromise and not turn to expediency. Yep, I’m just waiting for McCainservatives to tell me “yeah, f#ck Reagan, we need to win!”

Such is the current state of the GOP. Now, the principles of Ronald Reagan conservatism are gone and political expediency and supporting La Raza to win elections is in.

[ … ]

RUSH: My reaction when I saw it was good grief, good grief. I have a couple quotes here from Ronaldus Magnus, first one is from 1975. Some of you might want to needlepoint these on your pillows. “I don’t know about you,” said Reagan in 1975, “but I’m impatient with those Republicans who, after the last election, rushed into print saying we must broaden the base of our party, when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.”

I would suggest to you that that’s exactly what’s happening now. Republicans want to fuzz up and blur the differences between ourselves and the liberal Democrats. Second Reagan quote, 1976: “Don’t give up your ideals, don’t compromise, don’t turn to expediency — and don’t, for heaven’s sake, having seen the inner workings of the watch — don’t get cynical.”

February 4, 2008 , 10:24PM Posted by | 2008 Presidential Election, Conservatism, John McCain, Ronald Reagan | Comments Off on Reagan: Don’t Give Up Your Ideals, Don’t Compromise, Don’t Turn to Expediency

McCainservatives are Supporting La Raza

Michelle Malkin finally pulls out the big guns and puts out the hard reality of what McCainservatives are really supporting when they support John McCain for President: the racist, unAmerican La Raza.

Anyone who supports a politician who supports La Raza has my utter contempt. I don’t want to hear anyone call themselves an American and a conservative when they support and vote for someone who supports La Raza.

And before you try and spread your bullshit and attack me, be sure to read the whole post by Michelle Malkin. If you want to apologize for McCain’s bullshit, take it elsewhere. If you want the Republican Party to turn into the La Raza Party, then fuck off.

Seriously. FUCK.OFF.

You McCainservatives talk about being Patriots and being Americans, yet you support a candidate who supports La Raza. Sorry, I call that unAmerican and yes, I question your Patriotism.

I’ve had enough of this.

McCainservatives tell me there is no other choice, but to vote for John McCain. If that is true, that the only choice is to vote for a man for President whose main support is for a racist, anti-America group, then this country has already fallen. And I am ashamed to call these people my countrymen.

[ … ] According to the WaPo/ABC News poll released this weekend, 47% of respondents said McCain was the candidate they trusted most on immigration; 22% said Romney; 10% chose Huckabee; and 5% went with Paul.

If those voters knew about Juan Hernandez and Jerry Perenchio, McCain would be in single-digit Paul territory.

You want straight talk? McCain’s tongue says he’s “listened and learned.” But his heart is with La Raza, the militantly ethnocentric, anti-immigration enforcement Hispanic lobbying group that honored him in 1999 and whose annual conference he keynoted in 2004.

Go back and watch McCain on the Senate floor during the amnesty debate. Refresh your memories. Here he is comparing guest-worker tax treatment to Jim Crow laws.

[ … ]

Crooked talk: He says he’ll build the fence.

Straight talk: He resents what he calls the “goddamned fence.”

John McCain and La Raza-The Race share a deep-seated contempt for grass-roots conservatives who worked successfully to defeat the disastrous amnesty bill. And they share a common impulse to marginalize their political opponents as “haters.”

Thus, La Raza-The Race has launched a new “We Can Stop the Hate” campaign – smack dab in the middle of the campaign season – to redefine tough policy criticism from the Right as “hate.” They protest that it is “racist” and out-of-bounds to talk about reconquista – even as the McCain campaign boasts a “Mexico First/”Just A Region”/”Free Flow of People” outreach director who’s practicing it out in the open for the leading GOP presidential front-runner.

Yes, an ethnic separatist group that calls itself “The Race” – a group that has embraced John McCain and vice versa – has the gall to crusade against “hate.” Chris Kelly notes that La Raza-The Race head Janet Murguia is calling for networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves and that both La Raza-The Race and another open-borders group are pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes.

Read it:

Ms. Murguia argued that hate speech should not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights: “Everyone knows there is a line sometimes that can be crossed when it comes to free speech. And when free speech transforms into hate speech, we’ve got to draw that line. And that’s what we’re doing here today. And we need to make sure that network executives will hold their people accountable and not cross that line.”

Murgia praised McCain and looks forward to the “tapering down” of immigration enforcement efforts if he wins the White House: “With his emergence as a leading Republican presidential primary contender, I do think that we’ll see this toned down… Does it mean that we know everything he’s going to do in that area of reform? And I know he’s got his work cut out for him with a number of people, and we’ll see him put this whole platform together, but we do believe that if he ends up being in a lead role here, we think that that issue will be tapered down.”

No respect for the rule of law. No respect for the First Amendment.

[ … ]

The late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood of Georgia told the truth about La Raza-The Race and refused to be mau-maued. I’m reprinting his response in full:

It is with great amusement that I read the National Council of La Raza’s (NCLR) defense [from its president and CEO Janet Murguia.] against the facts contained in my article, “The Truth About ‘La Raza,'” that appeared in HUMAN EVENTS, April 10,2006. Instead of addressing the troubling facts outlined in the article, NCLR still seeks to hide from the truth through shrewd distractions.

Murguia claims: “Rep. Norwood mistranslates our name as the National Council of ‘the race.’ The actual definition of ‘La Raza’ is ‘people,’ referring to the Hispanic people or community.”

According to whom? The online encyclopedia Wikipeidia translation reads, “La raza: Spanish: ‘The race.'” Ditto with,, But here’s even more online fun: Type in “National Council of the RACE” on Google, the world’s number one search engine, and it will take you straight to NCLR’s home page. Case closed.

NCLR’s second objection is where the real deception becomes glaring: “NCLR did not receive $15.2 million in federal grants last year and no federal funds of any kind were used to fund get-out-the-vote efforts or for any political purpose.”

By “last year” my article refers to the last fiscal year reported by NCLR on its official website, which is fiscal year 2004. NCLR very cleverly fails to mention this fact, even though they surely knew precisely where the $15.2 million the article mentioned was coming from.

According to page 48 of the National Council of La Raza Consolidated Statements of Activities, Year Ended September 30,2004, NCLR itself reports it received $15,170,182 in federal grants. [See Figure 1 on page 9.] In the same statement, under “Advocacy and Electoral Empowerment” NCLR reports on page 27, “while in 2002 activities centered on Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV) efforts, in 2004 the project expanded to include voter registration, modest GOTV, and some elements of election protection,” and reports on page 48 that it spent $327,585 directly on “Legislative Advocacy” and another $2,611,827 on “Research, Advisory, and Legislation”-all while receiving that $15.2 million in federal grants.

Did NCLR’s receipt of $15.2 million in federal funds allow them to redirect other donations towards their combined $2.9 million in political activities? You be the judge.

But the real outrage in NCLR’s objections to the article is their disingenuous denial of their links to radical, racist and anti-American groups: “NCLR … unequivocally rejects, the motto Tor La Raza Todo, Fuera de la Raza Nada.’ (For The Race everything, for those outside The Race nothing.)”

No group can “unequivocally reject” a position while quietly paying out money to groups that support it, which is exactly what NCLR does.

The motto in question is that of the radical group MEChA and can be found online at the homepage of the Georgetown University MEChA Chapter. On the same site, you can read Georgetown MEChA’s Constitution, which contains the requirement that Georgetown MEChA maintain current membership in NCLR.

The Internal Revenue Service reports NCLR was actively funding the Georgetown University MEChA Chapter as recently as 2003, as documented in NCLR’s IRS Form 990, 2002 Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, Exhibit 1, Page 1. [See Figure 2 on page 9.]

If NCLR is sincere in objecting to the facts in the article they should have no problem publicly agreeing to all six points mentioned in my article:

1. Denounce the motto “For La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada,” as repugnant, racist, and totally incompatible with American society or citizenship-and stop funding groups who support it.

2. Acknowledge the right of all Americans to live wherever they choose in the U.S. without segregation.

3. Commit to sponsorship of nationwide educational programs to combat racism and anti-Semitism in the Hispanic community.

4. Denounce and sever all ties with MEChA and other organizations which hold to the racist doctrines held by MEChA.

5. Acknowledge our borders, the democratic right of U.S. citizens to determine immigration policy, and the right of the U.S. to enforce immigration law and secure its borders against unauthorized entry.

6. Repudiate all claims that current American territory rightfully belongs to Mexico.

Based on the documented and independently verified statements in the original article, not only does HUMAN EVENTS owe no correction to NCLR, NCLR owes the entire American public an apology for deceptively supporting groups seeking to undermine our national unity and sovereignty.

But perhaps the best solution would be for NCLR, from this day forward, to simply start living by the six points above.

February 4, 2008 , 10:23PM Posted by | 2008 Presidential Election, Fairness Doctrine, Illegal Immigration, John McCain, La Raza | 4 Comments

You Want to Take the Party to the Left, You Take it There and You Live and You Die by It

Damn, I am so glad we have Rush Limbaugh on the side of conservatism. Every time I get depressed that true Conservatives are giving up the fight, Rush Limbaugh comes through. It is so inspiring to hear a conservative stand up for what is right and not sellout for Party politics.

Drive-Bys Still Don’t Get This Show; Herald “Demise of Rush” Again


RUSH: [ … ] It’s been 20 years, and the people in the Drive-By Media still do not know how and why I do what I do and what my main objective and focus is. I kind of spelled it out for Howard, so we’ll see what he has — (interruption) Well, that’s true, if anybody knows what demise is, it’s the media. If anybody ought to be examining a demise, it’s them. They’re losing circulation; they’re losing viewers; they are losing advertisers; none of which is happening to me through any of this. Snerdley thinks there’s something else at work here, something other than the personal. They are trying to kill conservatism off, and I to them am conservatism, and they think that if I somehow fail to rally my robots in the audience to whoever it is I’m for or to vote against whoever it is I’m against, that conservatism is finished, and they’re, of course, eager for that, which is one of the reasons they love McCain. McCain will kill conservatism as a dominant force in the Republican Party.


[ … ]

RUSH: Well, that’s true. I’m not going to deny that. That’s one of the objectives here. That’s why I called this the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. The objective here, when you take the business objectives out, and this is a business, and this is one thing that nobody — the left or right — when they examine this program, none of them do so in terms of the career aspect of it. They look at me as a political figure who happens to be on the radio, while these other political figures are in the newspaper, and some of them are on television, and that’s just fine, because the longer they go not understanding what I do and how I do it — and, by the way, folks, don’t worry about any of this because the media did not make me. If the media doesn’t make you, they cannot break you. I can only break myself, and the only way I could do that would be doing something to destroy the bond that you and I have had here for 20 years. They can’t do that because they didn’t create it. Media buzz did not make this show a success, so media buzz and media criticism can’t destroy it. I don’t worry about it.

It’s a great luxury not to be concerned about what the media says about me, and they’ve tried. But the objective here, strip the business stuff aside, the objective here is to create a more informed, engaged, participatory public, and that’s happened. And one of the greatest — and there are many examples — one of the greatest examples of it was what happened with the amnesty bill. That was only last summer. Last summer, the amnesty bill, “Look at what talk radio did.” I’m not saying this; the Drive-Bys were saying it. Now, all of a sudden, we’re irrelevant. Because a piece of legislation doesn’t pass or because some candidate doesn’t win a primary, all of a sudden, we don’t exist.

Here are the sound bites. If I don’t get started on this we’re not going to get to the meat of them. Bob Schieffer interviewing Senator McCain on Face the Nation yesterday. Schieffer says, “Rush Limbaugh says you’re an imposter. What do you say to that?”

MCCAIN: I understand that primaries are tough, Bob. You’ve seen them, and sometimes there’s some bruised feelings, but I’m the — I have a strong conservative record that I’m proud to run on, and I believe — I know that I can unite the party once we get through this primary, and again, I’m proud of my record and I know that we can unite and move forward and win in November.

RUSH: I’m going to throw myself out of this. I don’t think Senator McCain understands nor do I think the Republican Party establishment understand just how much disgust there is out there amongst their own voters, people like you in this audience. I don’t think they get it. But another thing, for those of you out there in the Drive-Bys and even the Republican establishment types on our side, here you are, conservatism is dead, it’s over, it’s finished, no longer has any impact, how come every one of these candidates is talking about how they are the heir to Reagan, that they are conservative. They know they can’t win this election without the conservative base supporting them, and that is not guaranteed here.


[ … ]

RUSH: All right, the Drive-By Media is still running my non-concession speech that I gave last Wednesday. On Friday night’s NBC Nightly News, the reporterette Kelly O’Donnell and the Southern Baptist Convention’s Richard Land said this about me.

O’DONNELL: Romney is counting on help from Rush Limbaugh’s megaphone.

RUSH ARCHIVE: There is a lot of anxiety among a lot of conservatives about Senator McCain.

O’DONNELL: But that’s changing for some influential conservatives, who see McCain as the likely nominee, and fear infighting will hurt Republican chances in November.

LAND: Rush needs to get out and talk to average folk more.

RUSH: That was Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention. Now, I need to get out and talk to average folk more? Now, here we go. I can’t believe this. I’m an outsider. Now I’m back to being an elite. Dr. Land, with all due respect, I speak to 20 million people a day, and they call me, and they e-mail me — and I do, Dr. Land, speak to countless people in my travels around the country and so forth. Where does this come from, the assumption that I now am an elite? They can’t keep it straight from one day or from one week to the next. But do you notice again who’s supposed to cave here? According to this report, “That is challenging for influential conservatives who see McCain as the likely nominee, and they fear infighting will hurt Republican chances in November.” I’m just going to ask this point-blank. If the Republican Party’s gonna nominate a liberal, how is it that anybody opposing him is going to cause the Republican Party problems in November? The Republican Party is not a Liberal Party, and if we’re going to have a nominee who’s going to reach out to liberals and is saying they got more positive polling on their ideas than we do, how is it that somebody like me is going to destroy Republican Party unity?

How can it be said that I, one who remains loyal and practices fealty to the principles of conservatism, how is it that I who don’t waver — and people on my side of this, we do not waver; we stand firm; we haven’t wavered in 20 years — are going to get the blame for the Republican Party going down the tubes? These people think it. They already know it. There’s going to be a unity problem. Dr. Land, let me tell you something, these average folk you’re talk about, there are a whole lot more of them that think the way I am on this than are thinking the way you elites in the party are thinking, that any nominee who can beat a Democrat is better than any other nominee. That’s simply not right. People who have loyally supported the Republican Party, people who have given money to it do not want to sit around and see that money used to expand the party on the basis of attracting liberals with a liberal candidate — and, furthermore, they’re not going to take kindly to being told they’re to blame for it by not compromising their principles for the sake of party unity.

The Republican Party for too long has asked this of conservatives: “Sacrifice a little there, sacrifice a little here. Party unity is what matters.” A lot of Republicans are fed up with this. You can go back to November 2006 and look at those returns if you doubt me. I am not alone when I say to you elites in the Republican Party, punditry and elsewhere, party officials and whatnot, “If you’re going to go out and move this party to the left, you’re going to take the hit for what happens to it. We are not going to sit here and take the blame because we wouldn’t capitulate and unify. We don’t see the point of unifying with the left when they are making no compromises whatsoever. So screw it! You want to take the party your direction, you take it there and you live and die by it; if you believe so strongly in going that direction. We don’t, and most in this audience don’t, either.” I say that with confidence and assurance.


RUSH: This is so cool. This is Bob Shrum (0-8), who has yet to be able to claim victory in any presidential candidate that he has worked for, whose campaigns he has run. Most recently, it was the campaign of the haughty John Kerry, who served in Vietnam. So Shrum, big liberal Democrat excited that McCain picks up a half point every time I criticize him. Mary Matalin is exactly right. McCain is drifting to the left trying to pick up liberals and independents at the expense of conservatives. Democrats and crossovers in lieu of conservatives. That’s exactly what’s happening, and we conservatives are being told that we’re not necessary and so forth and we’re the problem. We’re being asked to shelve our principles, put ’em aside for the sake of party unity. The Republican Party had better understand that there’s enough people in this country who feel like they have done that for too long and it hasn’t gotten them anywhere. I’m talking about conservatives who have donated money. Those days are over. You’re not going to have a whole lot of people say, “Okay, conservatism doesn’t matter to us. We want to win instead,” and go ahead and welcome the expansion of the Republican Party by bringing in liberal Democrats and independents. If the Republican Party wants to go that way, they can go that way, but they’re going to do it without conservatives, and Mary Matalin’s point is no Republican nominee can win without the conservative base and the Republican Party. McCain and all of his endorsements make it clear that the conservative base doesn’t matter to them, that they’re more interested in liberal Democrats and independents.

And, of course, why wouldn’t Bob Shrum be excited about that? If I were any liberal Democrat, I’d be excited to see the Republican Party basically urinate on its conservatives. I’d love to see the Republican Party get fractured this way. I would love — if I’m a liberal Democrat — by the way, do you ever hear liberal Democrats say they need to expand by bringing conservatives in as conservatives? You don’t see any of this. They would love it if this were to happen, because they know that the party is going to get shellacked in the general election without the conservative base showing up. Don’t think for a minute that this liberal Democrat support for McCain is about McCain winning the general. It’s about McCain losing it. Do you think these Drive-By types and Bob Shrum types who love McCain are going to vote for him in November? You’ve got another thing coming if you do. They are not going to sabotage their own party. They may sabotage their party by doing stupid things, saying stupid things, but they’re not going to sabotage it by leaving it or trying to change its structure. Of course, I think they’re in trouble anyway, liberals are, but, moving on. [ … ]


RUSH: This is Tim Russert’s PMSNBC show on Saturday. He’s talking to E. J. Dionne, Jr., and Joe Klein of TIME Magazine and they’re talking about McCain, and E. J. Dionne, Jr., says, “Yeah, he’s fought them on a few issues, but he’s also never been part of the organization.” This is about McCain. The conservative organization, they’ve always fought him, kind of a grudge match, rooted deep, rooted in the past. And Joe Klein says…

KLEIN: You listen to Rush Limbaugh, and it’s always fun to listen to Rush when he’s desperate. When he’s riding high, you know, I can’t handle him. But listening to him, as I did last week, he sounds wounded. You know, “McCain isn’t a real Republican. He runs against the party.”

RUSH: Yeah, that’s why you love him, Joe. He’s running against the party. Maybe I’ve lost touch. It was just six months ago that when liberal media members started singing praises for somebody we were instantly suspicious, especially if they like them a lot. Now it somehow seems, you know, so many people — I just thought of something, Snerdley — how over the 20 years that we have been doing this, how many times have we taken calls from people who want to say, “Rush, maybe the media’s getting it. I saw something on TV last night, NBC, ABC, whatever, and X, and they thought that the media was –” and I would say to them, “You are setting yourself up for disappointment if you think you can measure the success of conservatism by whether or not liberal media members all of a sudden get persuaded. It isn’t going to happen.” But look what’s happening. We’ve got Drive-By Media members having orgasms over McCain, and that might be telling somebody, “Hey, man, the media likes McCain.” And that might be enough. Rather than it be a red flag, like it should be, maybe because so many conservatives have this terminally defensive posture and are seeking acceptance from the Drive-By Media and they see the Drive-By support for McCain as progress. They’re not looking at it wisely, shall I say. I’m trying to understand this. Verbal regurgitation of my thought process, the little gray cells and the fertile activity that’s going on. Snerdley is upset because Joe Klein called me desperate. We had so much fun last week with my non-concession speech. He mistakes passion for desperation. That’s all it is. These guys, it’s wishful thinking, Snerdley, you know this. Here’s the next one, and this one is E. J. Dionne, Jr., after Klein said that, you know, yeah, Limbaugh, he sounds wounded, McCain isn’t a real Republican, he runs against the party, Dionne, Jr., chimed in.

DIONNE: This will be a divorce between the conservative movement and the leadership of the Republican Party, a divorce after a 28-year marriage since 1980. John McCain, if he wins this nomination, will be winning it against organized conservatism, not just Rush Limbaugh, but the whole movement. And if you look at his base in the primaries, it’s been moderates, liberals, anti-Bush voters, pro-choice voters. McCain is pro-life, but it’s pro-choice voters. And so, you know, in a sense, Rush Limbaugh does reflect something that’s deep inside this movement.

RUSH: Yes. E. J. Dionne, Jr., from the Washington Post, salient, correct analysis. E. J. — oh, I don’t want to applaud too loud, it could harm his reputation with his friends. But he is right on the money with this. It is pro-choicers that are voting for McCain. I mean that’s who liberals are. Independents and moderates, that’s who they are. They’re scared to death to be pro-life because they’ll be identified with those creepy Christians. He’s exactly right. While McCain is out there saying he’s pro-life, he’s getting the pro-choice vote. And this, folks, is said to be good, this is said to be a way to expand our party. Let’s see. Fred Barnes, and this is what? Special report on Friday night, the guest host here Bret Baier, and they had Barnes on there in the roundtable, one of the all stars, and Baier says, “Fred, what does McCain have to do to reach out to the conservative base? Does he have to extend a hand out to somebody like Rush Limbaugh or whomever?”

BARNES: A top Republican strategist told me the thing he needs to do is call the top conservative radio talk show hosts who don’t like McCain and tell them and say, look, I know you don’t like me, you have an independent mind, but just watch the way I’m campaigning. I’m going to campaign as a conservative. If you have complaints or something, here’s my cell phone number, call me, I’ll answer.

RUSH: Okay, so Barnes says McCain’s supposed to come by for dinner, come by and say hi, call us up and whatever. McCain says he’s not going to do that, but he will answer the phone if we call. Now, Barnes has his latest piece in the Weekly Standard entitled, “Let’s Grow Up, Conservatives, and Defeat the Democrats in November.” Let’s grow up, conservatives. Fred, you used to be one of us. You used to be, Fred, but now you seem to be all for the party having its liberal wing, too. Anyway, he writes, “Republicans are in a sour mood, especially the talk-radio mafia that regards McCain as anything but a reliable conservative. (They harbor qualms about Romney, too.)” So potentate, tribal chief, tribal leader, leader of a herd, talk radio Mafia, Don Limbaughleone, and, of course, mullah will be next.

February 4, 2008 , 10:21PM Posted by | 2008 Presidential Election, Conservatism, John McCain, Liberalism, Rush Limbaugh | Comments Off on You Want to Take the Party to the Left, You Take it There and You Live and You Die by It

We Are Americans

“Why so large?”

“So that fat George can read it all the way from London without using his spectacles.”

SUPERBOWL AD: Declaration Of Independence – We Are Americans

“As the sun goes down, we shall honor and remember them.”


February 4, 2008 , 7:42PM Posted by | American History, Super Bowl XLII | Comments Off on We Are Americans

We Can Make the 2008 Election the Success of the 1992 Election

I wrote this in response to this post at Protein Wisdom: Voting & Pareto-suboptimal Solutions

None of us should not vote. Because then the mass media and both parties will spin the results whichever way they choose. However, a vote for the Democrat nominee will only send a message that the nation now supports Democrats and socialist government. However, a vote for McCain will only send the message that the Republican Party is now a party of liberalism, socialism and populism and Conservatism is dead. So, the only way I see for Conservatives to send a message that cannot be spun any which way the media, Democrats, Republicans and liberals/socialists want is to get a national write-in campaign going for a Conservative.

Now, people have told me that voting for Ross Perot in 1992 was a ‘waste’ of a vote and led to Bill Clinton. However, I look at that another way. Voting for Ross Perot sent the message to the Republican Party that people wanted fiscal conservatism in government. Republicans got the message and campaigned on that in 1994 and took the House for the first time in 40 years. Those Ross Perot votes were NOT wasted votes, they were message votes which gave us the House 2 years later.

The same thing applies now. Since we don’t have a 3rd Party Conservative, our only choice (unless Fred Thompson somehow gets the nomination in a brokered convention) is to get a national campaign to write-in a Conservative. My choice is Fred Thompson. I think most conservatives like him and wanted him to be the nominee, but they were too cowardly or too foolish enough to believe the mass media movement to call him “unelectable” to rally around him in the Primary. So now we are stuck with a liberal, socialist Republican vs a liberal, socialist Democrat.

My opinion is that the Republican Party is going to go down in flames no matter who is the nominee at this point, McCain or Romney. So the only thing we can do now is send our message. When the exit polls are released, they will show McCain getting trounced by either Obama or Hillary, but they will also show a Conservative movement of mass support for a 3rd Party Conservative. The Republican Party will see that and realize that unless they want to lose their conservative base to a major 3rd Party movement over the course of the next 4 years, they better get their heads out of their arses and get back to Conservatism.

February 4, 2008 , 12:14AM Posted by | 2008 Presidential Election, Conservatism, John McCain | Comments Off on We Can Make the 2008 Election the Success of the 1992 Election