20 thoughts on “Do I need any further proof?”

  1. Todo parece indicar que it will be a showdown between Hilary and Mc Cain…Cual de los dos es mas malo, bueno hay que votar por uno o quedarse en la casa en Noviembre 2008 y despues chuparse al que salga for 4 more years..thats life..We dont live in a perfect world

  2. Be that as it may… If I had to choose between the two, I would give John McCain my vote in a nsec. Senator Billary Klintonite would never ever, ever, ever ad infinitum get my vote!

  3. Seriously, if they really like McCain that much they should never have endorsed him. There isn’t a self-respecting conservative willing to follow the NYTs lead on anything.

  7. I’m a Cuban American and a Republican, and out of every Republican running for the presidency in November McCain is the most experienced and the most electable.
    I love Babalu Blog but I don’t understand why the constant bashing of a man who was a POW for 5 years under the Vietcong. Who knows better about the evils of communism and who is more passionate to defeat the commies like fidel and chavez?
    Also the Diaz-Balart’s and Illena Ros-Lehtinen have given McCain their support because they too believe in McCain’s principles. http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/news/PressReleases/e855848c-daa0-48a5-9ff9-fc0c890c5a9c.htm
    Sure his environmental and economic policies aren’t, supremely conservative pero el tipo tiene mas cojones que nadie para ser presidente.
    And just for the record, the NYT will be bashing him anyway.
    McCain para una Cuba LIBRE!!

  8. Mr. VIllar, here is your answer:
    HE IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE. HE IS A LIBERAL HIDING BEHIND A CONSERVATIVE FACADE. HE HAS ONE solid CONSERVATIVE CREDENTIAL, AND THE REST HE IS AS CRAVEN AS THE DEMOCRATS.
    End of yelling.

  9. Mr. Moneo,
    Can we say, according to your argument, that the Diaz Balart’s and Illena Ros-Lehtinen are also liberals.
    And if not wouldn’t they see the past the “conservative facade” before supporting McCain?
    Just asking no yelling.

  10. With Romney, you get a candidate that came closer than anyone to defeating Kennedy in his home turf of Massachusetts. With McCain, you get Kennedy’s policies in a Republican candidacy.

  11. LOL! OK, no yelling. I don’t trust him. That’s the bottom line. He co-sponsored the biggest single assault on the First Amendment since the founding of this country (McCain/Feingold). For that alone, I cannot support him. Add to that McCain/Kennedy, The Gang of Fourteen, his consistent votes against tax cuts, the undermining of Bush’s Federal Court appointees, and on and on. I can’t support him. If he is the candidate, as I said earlier this week, I’ll vote for him; but that doesn’t mean I think I he is the best that we put up against the demented Democrats or that I like him or trust him.
    As for Lincoln and Ileana, they vote conservative on a lot of issues and not so conservative on others. But I trust Ileana and I trust Lincoln to do their best for their constituents. I think McCain is a weasel. Sorry. That’s how I feel.
    One last question: What reason would the New York FIshwrap have to endorse McCain? Answer me that Batman…

  12. I wouldn’t put too much weight on political endorsements. More often than not, political debts or friendships, not ideology, motivates them. How else can you explain Duncan Hunter endorsing Huckabee, the supposedly most conservative candidate endorsing one of the most liberal?

  13. Val, Tony, George and all:
    The NYT support could be an attempt to sabotage McCain’s chances. It is my understanding that McCain was tortured in Vietnam, perhaps by those S&*^B who Castro sent over there….
    p.s. does anybody have documentation of Hillary cutting cane for Castro …
    Larry

  14. Batman says,
    I agree with Larry on the sabotaging point. Plus like I said before, come November, NYTs won’t be kissing McCain’s feet when their dream girl’s running against him.
    George, we’ll agree to disagree, but McCains more in touch with the realities in Cuba right now. More-so than Mitt “Patria o Muerte, Venceremos”Romney or Mike “I have no clue about foreign politics” Huckabee. No other candidate has had the Cambio bracelet on. It could be all rhetoric but it seems sincere.
    I think a McCain -Thompson ticket will make the best sense to help lead the fight for a free and sovereign Cuba (and will make Henry happy too).

  16. Hey George what do you base the beloved three stooges as being more conservative than McCain? Just curious because according to the ACU the lifetime rating for John McCain is 82.3 Only Mario edges him out with an 85.9. Ros-Lehtinen garners a 76.5 while Lincoln flops at 74.4.
    Maybe you’re thinking that the score takes into account McCain’s more conservative early years. Let’s just look at the most recent sampling then. McCain is in fact much less conservative than he used to be with only a 65 rating. Pretty pathetic but consider that the rock ribbed Republicans of Mario, Ileana and Lincoln manage 64, 63, and 60 respectively. Meaning that the hated non-conservative McCain is more conservative than any one of our sainted representatives in the Congress.
    I won’t even embarrass you with the scores from either Freedomworks or the National Taxpayers Union. In the NTU rating all three stooges were closer to Kucinich than McCain. While two of the three were closer to Clinton and Kerry than the non-conservative McCain.
    Facts are stubborn things.
    Incidentally the much reviled Flake has lifetime 94.7 and recently nailed a 100.

  17. I must confess that I did hate McCain for awhile. First I admired him for his service and it was a thrill meeting him when he was out there campaigning for Phil Gramm. Then after that whole debacle in 2000 and he openly flirted with switching parties I was praying he would to end the charade. I agree that campaign finance is horrible but W has done more damage to the Conservative movement and to the Republican party than McCain ever could – particularly continuing to federalize education and the insanely expensive Medicare plan. Don’t even get me started on the half-assed occupation of Iraq and his unwillingness to cut Rumsfeld loose.
    I’m back with Mac because I may not agree with him on everything but I know where he stands. Romney agrees with me on everything apparently but his road to Damascus conversion rings hollow.

  18. The ACU ratings are good if you want to take a look at a person’s overall rating. The problem many conservatives have with McCain is that, despite his high ACU score, he voted on the moderate to liberal side on a few KEY issues, and that’s what we remember. McCain/Feingold, McCain/Kennedy(!), against the Bush tax cuts at first. Those are big issues McCain went to the other side on.
    Sure, the three Cuban-American reps had lower scores than McCain. Big deal. I’ve never heard anyone in politics describe the Diaz-Balarts and Ros-Lehtinen as far right conservatives anyway. It’s a case of mis-perception because of their strong views on Cuba. As George accurately pointed out, those three serve their constituents well, many of which don’t happen to be well to do.

  19. Spin it however you want but the three stooges are pork-barrelling, log-rolling, tax spending, welfare loving sycophants. They “serve the interests” of the base with no regard to the future of their districts or of the nation. They figure if they bring the bacon home and slap Fidel around on the radio that they can bus their voters to the polls and be assured a victory…and they are right. Meanwhile they have done nothing to encourage development and entrepreneurship in their districts. If you are a YUCA it is best to up and go elsewhere. This great nation of ours is peppered with classmates of mine from the U who wanted to stay here but had limited opportunities.
    Even the staffs of the three mental midgets are dim bulbs more adept at dealing with drudgery that is the bureaucracy than actually formulating policy or persuading others to their point of view. They can get abuelita a replacement for that lost Social Security check but they haven’t a clue as to what truly ails South Florida. Name one just one signature piece of legislation that these three geniuses have put together in their eternity in the US Congress…just one. They are a disgrace to Cuban-Americans. The saving grace is that I’m not a New Yorican so I don’t have to be ashamed to be associated with their people in the House.
    As for McCain, he overcompensated for his whole Lincoln Financial mess. Was he wrong yes. Campaign finance reform is a failure which just enriched consultants and lawyers eager to find the new loopholes. Did McCain oppose tax cuts, yes. While I thought that we should get more cuts it is not unknown for old school fiscal conservatives to oppose them and want spending cuts to go along with them. Even Alan Greenspan prefers that.

  20. There’s a must read article on McCain at the National Review Online, excerpt:
    Senator McCain has engaged in a years-long campaign against Wisconsin Right to Life, an organization dedicated to advancing the pro-life agenda. Conservatives, one might have thought, would be stunned by a grand-slam only the modern Left could love: McCain has (a) urged the courts to judicially legislate a (b) suppression of free-speech rights (c) against an anti-abortion group which was (d) trying to urge the confirmation of conservative Bush judicial nominees.
    And the cherry on top? McCain’s exertions were singularly designed to protect one of the Senate’s most liberal incumbents: Russ Feingold (D., Wis.), McCain’s soul-mate in the evisceration of First Amendment rights (also known as the McCain/Feingold “campaign finance reform” law). A pro-abortion stalwart who scores a whopping 93 percent on NARAL’s pro-choice report card, Feingold has also opposed the Patriot Act and every sensible national security measure taken after 9/11 … in addition to seeking President Bush’s censure over the effort to penetrate al-Qaeda communications during wartime.
    McCain believes political speech is bad for democracy — as long, of course, as there is an exemption for mainstream media speech that swoons over “mavericks” who break with conservatives over immigration, global warming, the Bush tax cuts, etc. The Senator, however, is astute enough to know his assault on the First Amendment is wildly unpopular with the people whose nomination he seeks. So, to put their minds at ease, he told National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru last year that he was satisfied by President Bush’s 2002 decision to sign McCain/Feingold into law. He would, he assured, seek no further “legislation” to ban political speech.
    Turns out the captain of the “Straight-Talk Express” left out one itsy-bitsy detail. Even as he spoke those words, he was — as an influential senator — exhorting the United States Supreme Court to tack a sweeping judicial ban onto the already extensive McCain/Feingold restrictions.
    The target was Wisconsin Right to Life (WRTL). This pro-life group well understood that when it comes to abortion, the action is in the federal courts. In 2004, the president was working to put his pro-life stamp on those courts by appointing conservative judges. He was being blocked by Democrats, who, though in the minority, were capitalizing on the chamber’s procedural rules to filibuster nominees for the all-important federal appellate courts. One of those Democrats was none other than Sen. Feingold. So WRTL decided to run issue ads, urging Feingold to do his constitutional duty and give the Bush nominees an up-or-down vote.
    or in the interim, while Republicans still controlled the Senate in 2006, McCain led a bipartisan “Gang of 14” which, at the eleventh hour, prevented the Senate from repealing its filibuster rule in the confirmation context. As a result, many of the conservative Bush appointees never got confirmed.
    Worse still, in the subsequent midterm election, control of the Senate shifted to the Democrats — with whom McCain constantly brags of his willingness to collaborate. With the Judiciary Committee now in Democrat hands, Bush judicial nominations have stalled. Vacancies on the top courts mount. Largely thanks to McCain, the Left now has its ideal scenario: the ability to drag its feet until after the 2008 election, after which a President Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama can fill those openings and dramatically move the federal courts in the direction of abortion rights and sundry “progressive” pieties.
    This is not something that happened 10, 20 or 30 years ago. It reflects who the Senator is today. For another Republican presidential candidate, such a performance would be disqualifying. Why has McCain gotten away with it?
    The whole article is here:
    http://tinyurl.com/29qo5h

Comments are closed.