This article is right on. McCains tactics in the debate and before the Florida primary and in past debates were like a school-yard punk.

There is a difference between their "attacks". Romney has only pointed out real issues that McCain took, like being only one of 2 of all republican senators to vote against Bush tax cuts. That is a real position that the overwhelming majority of republicans and conservatives are against; it is a very liberal position. It is a fact. It may be negative in the strictist technical sense, but it is not a personal attack.

On the other hand, McCain's attacks are nebulously trying to imply that Romney is a lier in a personal way. Of course, they selected him to replace the corrupt Olympic management precisely because he had a reputation for impecable honesty.

GO Romney!

There is nothing McCain can do at this point to save himself with Conservatives. How long should we sit and tolerate the sharp stick he jabs in our eye every time he opens his mouth?

It will be fun to watch the media turn on him, once he gets the nomination. They have played that simple minded fool for all he’s worth. Building him up and protecting him solely for the purpose of getting Hillary in a position to crush him like a bug. It won’t be pretty, but it will be fun to watch McCain’s true constituency turn on him. He won’t know what hit him, and he won’t see it coming, and that’s what will make it so sweet to watch.

The GOP doesn't seem to learn from their mistakes anymore. 2006 should have been a big wakeup call, but so far no one except those of us on the sidelines heard it. McCain isn't worthy of our support.

When you meet with McCain's guy he's going to try to tell you that Romney has changed on "every position." Don't buy it. If you go down the line you see that all of McCain's claims are as false as the "timetable" charge. The anti-Romney propaganda is easily dissected once you know the truth. "claim": In 2005 Mitt Romney said the McCain immigration bill was "reasonable," but opposed it in 2007. Truth: Romney explicitly refused to endorse the 2005 bill. His position hardly changed; the bill itself changed. "claim": As Governor, Romney refused to comment on Bush's tax cuts. Truth: When asked, Romney was trying to pass a state budget through a liberal legislature and wisely stayed out of national politics. "claim": taxes went up under Romney. Truth: cities raised taxes, Romney cut them. "claim": Fees are like taxes. Truth: a fee covers costs for a special good or service (similar to paying a local business); Romney saved tax dollars by reducing the taxpayer subsidy of fees. "claim": Under Romney there were sanctuary cities. Truth: sanctuary status was instituted on a city level, outside Romney's purview. "claim": Romney changed on gay rights. Truth: the words "gay rights" had different meaning in 1994 than they do today. Romney has consistently stood and fought against gay marriage. "claim": Romney didn't execute any criminals. Truth: there is no death penalty in Massachusetts but Romney fought for it. "claim": Romney said he didn't line up with the NRA then became a member. Truth: Romney has always agreed with most NRA positions but never lined up on everything. "claim": Romney favored waiting periods and now opposes them. Truth: Romney favors background checks but technology has changed so waiting periods are no longer required for background checks. "claim": Romney said his father marched with Martin Luther King, Jr. Truth: George Romney participated in Dr. King's marches, led a march of 10,000 and was praised by MLK, Jr. who spoke positively about the prospect of George Romney running for president. Then there is abortion. They claim Romney provided 50 dollar abortion co-pays in his health-care bill. Truth: the abortion co-pay was court-mandated and was not part of the bill.

Full disclosure: a) I'm a Romney guy, but b) I'm smart enough to know I'm not smart enough to know everything,

So with McCain the front-runner, I watched last night's debate--my first this political season from start to finish.

I'm sorry, Senator. With all due respect for the years of service you've given this nation, you came across as petty, bitter, and frankly a little desperate.

And side by side with Governor Romney the differences were even MORE clear. I couldn't help cringing when I thought of you on the same stage as Senators Clinton or Obama.

Hey, you and Hil may be friends... but she will eat you, chew, and spit you from Maine to California. And the young, fresh, vibrant Obama will make you look even more like you did last night: wasted and frail.

Jeepers, at least you and Romney have agreements. What are you going to look like to America across the podium from the Democrat? Are you going to lose your famous temper when they point out you record? Are you going to mumble and stumble your way all the way to November?

If you're the nominee I'll vote for you... but I'm afraid, sir, that your name at the top of the ticket is dooming us to another Carter presidency.

Due to a prior commitment, I was unable to watch the debate but saw the highlights and roundtables. It reminded me of why I won't vote for McCain. Specifically, an air of arrogance, as though disagreeing with him makes you part of the No Viet Cong. His snide remarks, his side chuckles in accepting his Florida win and his ramblings of no particular nature or direction. I won't sit this election out, but I sure as hell ain't voting for McCain. If, for no other reason, he just doesn't understand economics, doesn't have the faintest idea of what the private sector is all about, and if anything, his stance (or should I say "new" stance) on immigration is to build the fence first then grant amnesty. Heck, I'm surprised Teddy K. hasn't endorsed McCain.

Go Romney!!

The "straight-talking" John McCain has trouble telling the truth.

Only true leaders have the courage and strength to speak the truth.

Mitt Romney is that leader.

Who is the real leader...
Who is the real conservative...

Mitt Romney! Our next President.

John McCain = the DNC's TROJAN HORSE

The walls of Troy could not be breached by the enemy from the outside. So feigning peace, the enemies of Troy presented them with a gift, the Trojan Horse.

"Look here, this is a gift of peace. We cannot defeat you so we may as well work together!"

But as we know, the belly of the horse was full of the enemies soldiers, ready to sack Troy in the dead of night and open the gates so that the army might rush in.

Even so, the MSM has presented us with John McCain. "Look", they say, "we cannot defeat you, but here is a man who can work across the aisle. He can bring us together. Accept him as our gift of peace!"

And so the unwitting Moderates wheel him into the Republican City, despite the cries and protests of the Conservatives who sense trickery afoot.

And once inside the gates, the DNC springs forth from the belly of the McCain Trojan Horse and opens the doors to our great city, allowing liberal principles and class warfare to rush in.

Before you know it, we are no longer the City of Ronald Reagan, but the Vity of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

We look back at the story of the Trojan Horse and wonder, "how could the Trojans have been so foolish as to accept a "gift" from their sworn enemies?"

How indeed...

Now that Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson are out of the race, I am voting for Mitt Romney in the primary.

Of course if McCain is the nominee I will vote for him against Hillary or Obama - McCain cares about this country and understands the war on terror and is staunchly pro-life. Hillary - she only cares about her political ambitions. Obama - I give him the benefit of the doubt, but he is naive about Islamic terrorism.

However, Romney would be a better President, I think, than McCain. He has a better understanding of the economy, as was apparent last night. He is very smart, articulate and he has stood by his wife through her battle with MS, which shows a loyalty and character I appreciate.

MCcain-Giuliani will take Clinton-Obama

And Fl will the key -- once again

Matt,

Just for experimentation's sake, you may want to join Alan Bartlett's Ron Paul Meet Up group and participate in the Revolution for a bit. It will give you renewed hope in our nation's future.

The RP Revolution is something that will probably not be witneessed again in our lifetimes. It is truly amazing.

Don't drink the McCain kool-aid Matt. Just say no.

"Yet even after his misrepresentation was made plain to him, McCain stuck to his story and continued insisting that Romney had said something that Romney clearly had not -- and at that point it just becomes a lie. And that's significant for a man who has built his campaign on honor, straight talk and honesty."

This sounds just like Bush with everybody else who said that there were no wmd's in Iraq and that Osama Bin Laden was not in Iraq, but Bush stuck to his story and insisted on things that were never true in pursuing war in Iraq.

It's great to hear a Republican who is not happy with someone blindly sticking to falsehoods.

So, with that being said, you are going to go with Romney simply because you don't like McCain? That's a shame, because one should pick a candidate, not pick against one.

The current pool of Republican candidates do not adequately satisfy the basic tenants of having records of lowering taxes and minimizing government.

McCain is a problem, your points are spot on. You watch McCain in action and can never envision him as President. He should have taken is front-runner status and used it to build bridges, instead he is so arrogant, smug and full of himself that he cannot help but lower himself -- even to the point of the ongoing lie.

When you meet with McCain's colleague, please ask him this, "what are we supposed to tell our kids?" When Mr. McCain's colleague tries to re-argue why we should all believe McCain's absurd assertion that Romney was supporting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, please let him know that not only are we not buying McCain's ridiculous claims, but more importantly, his recent words and actions have resulted in many of us concluding that McCain is dishonest and cannot be trusted. How do I explain to my kids that it's ok to lie if it's just "politics"? How do I explain to my kids that it's ok to lie if you were once a great warrior for your country? I do not ask this question flippantly. In fact, it is painful for me to have reached this conclusion. I am a moderate Republican - one who has followed this primary closely and seriously. I have studied these candidates and tried to come to a sound decision regarding who I will support. I have involved my family in this political contest. (Believe it or not, my 7 year old son is very interested in the process...wanting to know which state is voting next, who is winning and why, who dropped out and why, gaining a sense for our two party process.) Please try to let Senator McCain know why it matters to me (and others) that he, the man of "service, straight talk and integrity" has failed us. I am the daughter of a WWII vet. My father (now 83 and still hanging in there) was a marine who served 4 years in the Pacific. He received 3 purple hearts and a silver star. He did not go the Naval Academy, nor was his father an admiral. Rather he was a 17 year old farm boy from rural western America who answered the call. My father IS a hero and a man of integrity. McCain (who wraps himself in the flag and justifies his candidacy based in large part upon his record of military service and his heroic years as a POW) crossed over the line that separates people who have integrity from those who have none. He lied and he continues to attempt to perpetuate the lie. Let me be clear - it's not the subject of the lie that is disturbing - smart people can sort through the facts. Rather, plain and simple, it is the fact that he lied. What do I tell my children? Do I tell them it's ok to lie to get what you want so long as you served in the military? Do I tell them it's ok to lie to get what you want so long as you were a POW? Do I tell them it's ok to lie to get what you want so long as you were a senator? My dad taught me, and I'm trying to teach my children, it's NOT ok to lie. One of the ways to reinforce that...we DO NOT VOTE FOR PEOPLE WHO LIE. Please tell McCain - for those of us who TRULY have the highest regard for our military men and women; those of us who TRULY believe our fighting men and women deserve a place in our hearts and our minds and our history that is reserved for those who are HONEST and consistently stand for a principle so basic as THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR, he has failed the test and does not deserve our support. Please thank Mr. McCain for his service, but let him know he does not meet my expectations and I WILL NOT hold him out as a role model for my children.

Last night's debate was a farce. Romney and McCain bickered back and forth about who said what, taking cheap shots and bringing up petty, unimportant points.

What happened to the Republican Party of ideas?

What happened to the Republican Party of Reagan, who told us "government is the problem"?

Neither McCain nor Romney are running from a principled, philosophical base. They both like power for power's sake, and will say and do anything to get it -- including spinning their own pasts and attacking each other.

How stupid. How juvenile.

H. L. Mencken was right: "No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby."

Ron Paul has been, and remains, the only candidate in the race who actually is running on principled ideas. Republicans have marginalized him to their own hurt. We will lose, and lose big, in November, and the country will be much worse for it.

John McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts twice. This should be a wake up call to any Republican who believes in limited government. He frequently bashes businesses like pharmaceuticals and takes shots at Romney's successes in the business world. These should be red flags to average Republicans!

Jubal:
I respectfully disagree. The debate was a non-event for me. The hand wringing reminds me of 2002 when an electable "moderate" (Riordan)was rejected for an unelectable "conservative" (Simon). This state suffered needlessly as a result of Gray Davis' election.
Fact--Romney is not electable nationally; McCain is. While McCain is not a perfect candidate, I see no reason to put this country through what California went through. I will go with a guy I agree with 80% of the time and perhaps I can influence who will win, then I guy I agree with 90% of the time but will surely lose.

Pasman:

Your "fact" about McCain being electable while Romney is not is just an opinion. A lot of people, including me, have a different opinion - that McCain will look like a tired old dog next to Hillary or Obama, and his now favorable press will turn unfavorable as soon as he is the Republican nominee.

If you're willing to vote for a guy who is telling obvious lies about his opponent besides having a consistent history of voting against Republican principles, then you're willing to sacrifice those principles for a very uncertain "fact".

Pasman...Romney IS electable, and comparing him to Simon is flawed. Romney looks much more electable than Simon in his glasses all nerdy like. McCain will get torn apart against Hillary and Obama just because he looks old. Only Romney will appear vibrant and energetic on stage against either candidate.

To those who use the 80% line or Sen. McCain's 83 rating with the American Conservative Union, it is what Sen. McCain is passionate about. LIBERAL ISSUES! Outside of support of the war, which is marginal when you scratch below the surface, lets look at what he talks about. "Compreshensive immigration reform" which, with a little window dressing, is the biggest amnesty program ever proposed. Sen. McCain did not want to reach out to Republicans. No, he let Teddy Kennedy throw in what he wanted. Oh, BTW, those that think all of these Hispanics would vote Republican are not getting that the Dems promise all the government goodies. No contest. Sen. McCain buys into globaloney warming, hook, line and sinker. "Campaign Finance Reform" is more like suppression of free speech. Look at some of Sen. McCain's supporters. Some do not want a conversation. Just line up and shut up. Everything we accuse liberals of doing is wrapped up in Sen. John McCain. Oh, one more BTW. THREE MONTHS ago, Rudy Giuliani was the leader in the national polls, the one to beat both Hilary and St. Barack. See how much that changes quickly. If Sen. McCain is the nominee, he will be beaten up the Hilary or St. Barack. Let us see if Sen. McCain would say "F--- You" to either of them as he did to Sen. Cornyn when he questioned the "comprehensive immigration reform" bill-scam.
GO MITT MAN!!!

Romney is completely untested as a social conservative.

So what are you deaf and blind to Huckabee? He shined in the debate - especially on that last question.

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=1321

The fact is Romney doesn't hold a credible lead in ANY Super Tuesday state. A vote for Mr. Global Capitalist Romney is a vote for Juan McCain.

Neither one cares too much about OUR national sovereignty, much less proposing real long-term solutions to the challenges we're facing.

McCain proved is a mentally unstable liar last night. I will vote for Hillary over him. Only Obama is worse.

Jubal wrote:
"I respectfully disagree. The debate was a non-event for me. The hand wringing reminds me of 2002 when an electable "moderate" (Riordan) was rejected for an unelectable "conservative" (Simon). This state suffered needlessly as a result of Gray Davis' election."

Andy's comment: But, Jubal, we can look at the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger and say the same thing. I was criticized as "not being a real Republican" for supporting Tom McClintock in the recall election. We are suffering needlessly under candidate of political expediency, Arnold Schwarzenegger. (Or will be suffering as the end to his reign of expanding government reaches its tragic conclusion.)

The fact is John McCain is too unstable to be president of the United States. And his association with Hershonson who wants to carpet bomb Iraq, a country of 25,000,000 people, to wipe out 1,200 Al Quada (estimate by the Iraq Study Group), makes me very uneasy from a sanctity of life perspective.

Ron Paul is the only rational choice.

I want to remind our leadership the we Republicans have principles:

1. Less government interference in our lives
2. Lower Taxes
3. More Liberty

Therefore, I'm voting for Ron Paul come Tuesday, unless you can convince that your guy is better on these three issues.

-tylerh

Ummmm, remind me, what is there for conservatives to like about McCain?

Clue: The establishment hates Romney. They love McCain/Gramnesty just like they liked Ford/Dole '76 and Dole/Kemp in '96.

SoulSamarai,

Where did you get your facts on Romney having no lead in any super Tuesday states? Just curious.

It wouldn't be the first time that those criticizing Romney don't bother themselves with using factual information when trying to defame Mitt Romney.
I hope you all feel better about yourselves when you drag down a perfectly good man to further your agenda.

Huckabee would be wonderful with foreign policy. I'm sure Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will me mesmorized by Huckabee's preaching abilities and not only will they align their countries with the US, but they will also convert to Christianity. Not likely. Huckabee should stick with being a preacher, he is really good at it. I do agree that he was fun to listen to last night.

SoulSamarai,

Where did you get your facts on Romney having no lead in any super Tuesday states? Just curious.

It wouldn't be the first time that those criticizing Romney don't bother themselves with using factual information when trying to defame Mitt Romney.
I hope you all feel better about yourselves when you drag down a perfectly good man to further your agenda.

Huckabee would be wonderful with foreign policy. I'm sure Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will me mesmorized by Huckabee's preaching abilities and not only will they align their countries with the US, but they will also convert to Christianity. Not likely. Huckabee should stick with being a preacher, he is really good at it. I do agree that he was fun to listen to last night.

So far, McCain's critics have been almost exclusively from the right as the liberal media sit back and wait for their useful idiot to take the nomination. He has been their choice for the past 8 years to lead the republican party, but there's no way they'll back him against any democrat. Watch the mainstream media swarm over him like a school of starving piranhas once the real contest begins. We will hear far more about the Keating 5 than we ever heard of it when it first occurred, in addition to every outburst of temper McCain has exhibited over the years.
They have plenty of ammunition to make him an easy target for defeat. His stance on Iraq, which has gained him some favor from conservatives, will be used to demonize him to the democrats who might have been tempted to support him based on the previous glowing reviews he received from the liberal media.
This, combined with the number of conservatives who will sit this election out, will give an easy victory to the democrat nominee, regardless of who it is

For you Romney guys, kind of hard to defend Romney as a conservative when you hear words of a moderate or liberal coming out of his mouth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5FGtR0bHkI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

here's what I found interesting about what Mccain tried to do Rommey last night. He tried to apply a standard (Rommey shouldn't have even discussed timetables because they were wrong period). given that standard this should apply:

* Mccain should have never sponsored an amensty bill because it should have had border security first.

* Mccain should have never sponsored a bill that gutted the first amendment since it was wrong period.

* Mccain should have never stopped the effort to end the fillibusters of administration appointments because it was wrong period.

It seems like Mccain own standard if applied to him will show he's not worth of being President of the United States.

Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

Quick, let's go to the videotape to see how deep Mitt Romney's convictions really are:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

Lots of good stuff at RomneyFacts.com

Wow, Dan. You've discovered what everyone already knew: Mitt Romney's change some of his stances over the last 13 years.

Didn't you used to be a Republican? But I guess that's different.

Dan, say it ain't so.

I was a registered Republican for two years, when I was 18; I have been voting Democrat since 1981.

But I'm not running for president boys; and Governor Romney ran for Senate and Governor in Massachusetts on a hard left platform. Now he'shard to the right. When John Kerry changed positions, you guys crucified him for being a flip flopper. Bill Clinton was accused of governing based on polls. But Romney does both and gets to skate? Pot, meet Kettle. It's called hypocrisy fellas.

Romney is a multiple choice candidate. I actually hope he wins; he'll be easier to take down.

Governor Romney ran for Senate and Governor in Massachusetts on a hard left platform.

What planet do you live on where Romney's Senate campaign is "hard left"?

I can't even take you seriously when you say stuff like that.

I hope McCain's got a big staff - there are a lot of Republicans who will need a personal visit in order to change their minds.

Romney vs. Obama or Hilary - I vote Romney.

McCain vs. Hilary - I'll plug my nose and vote for McCain.

McCain vs. Obama - I'll plug my nose and vote for Obama. I think there are lots of Republicans who feel this way.

Anon .. I only lived in Boton for 9 years or so and the reaction of my pals there during the 2002 race is we have a Republican effectively running on a Democratic platform. Pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-middle class, pro-public education, a desire for universal healthcare. Just search YouTube for Romney+2002 debate and you'll hear him yourself.

Matt -- I posted a comment a couple of days ago that somehow went to the post's author (you) for approval in this thread and it still hasn't run. Did you miss it, are you holding it or have you begun to censor a leftist viewpoint here?

McCain and Romney do not represent traditional Republican values. Ron Paul does and it saddens me that so many people in our party have forgotten what being, "a Republican" truly means.

Republicans in general have fallen for the mainstream media's anti-Paul propaganda and purposeful marginalization. Most Republicans do not know that Paul came in 2nd in Nevada and Louisiana. Many are keenly unaware that he raised more money than any other candidate in the 4th quarter (19 MM) and the most money from our active duty military. A very stark few really know what he actually believes in.

McCain is an establishment candidate who will ensure a democrat becomes POTUS. So very sad...

Matt -- I posted a comment a couple of days ago that somehow went to the post's author (you) for approval in this thread and it still hasn't run. Did you miss it, are you holding it or have you begun to censor a leftist viewpoint here?

Dan:

1) You know I don't censor leftist comments, so I'm surprised you're even asking (other than to be annoying).

2) Comments aren't moderated. I don't have to approve them before they appear. I don't know what happened to your comment.

For your persual, I have posted a writeup containing the actual statements by Romney concerning milestones and timetables.

After reading the actual quotations, I think it is fair to conclude that Romney did support setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Saying that, however, does not mean that he supported the Democrats' "cut and run" approach. Rather, what he seems to be supporting is Bush's original "train and withdraw" approach, which was failing at the time. (For more information on this approach, see in this week's Weekly Standard "How Bush Decided on the Surge" by Fred Barnes.)

The goal of that "train and withdraw" approach was to give the Iraqi government a chance to survive America's departure from Iraq ... like we gave the South Vietnamese government a chance to survive the withdrawal of our troops from the country before the fighting was over. Of course, things didn't work out particularly well for the South Vietnamese, but that's another story.
=============================================

McCain, Romney, and Timetables [Byron York]
Sunday January 27, 2008

Greetings from Florida. I know the sentiments here in the Corner about the McCain-Romney tussle over Iraqi timetables. But I have to say that, looking at what Romney said last April, I think McCain has a point. Here is the exchange in question, from ABC's "Good Morning America" on April 3, 2007:

MS. ROBERTS: Iraq. John McCain is there in Baghdad right now. You have also been very vocal in supporting the president and the troop surge. Yet, the American public has lost faith in this war. Do you believe that there should be a timetable in withdrawing the troops?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, there's no question but that — the president and Prime Minister al-Maliki have to have a series of timetables and milestones that they speak about. But those shouldn't be for public pronouncement. You don't want the enemy to understand how long they have to wait in the weeds until you're going to be gone. You want to have a series of things you want to see accomplished in terms of the strength of the Iraqi military and the Iraqi police, and the leadership of the Iraqi government.

MS. ROBERTS: So, private. You wouldn't do it publicly? Because the president has said flat out that he will veto anything the Congress passes about a timetable for troop withdrawals. As president, would you do the same?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, of course. Can you imagine a setting where during the Second World War we said to the Germans, gee, if we haven't reached the Rhine by this date, why, we'll go home, or if we haven't gotten this accomplished we'll pull up and leave? You don't publish that to your enemy, or they just simply lie in wait until that time. So, of course, you have to work together to create timetables and milestones, but you don't do that with the opposition.

Reading that, I think it's fair to conclude that Romney was saying he was in favor of Bush and Maliki setting a secret timetable for a U.S. troop withdrawal. (By the way, I didn't think that was a bad idea, on the grounds that the Iraqis needed to be pushed hard before they would get anything done.) Certainly people who were listening took it that way; at the time of Romney's statement, there was a fair amount of reaction, much of it from the left, to the effect that Romney was coming around to the idea of a timetable. His pledge to veto a congressionally-imposed timetable seemed based on the idea that such a timetable would necessarily involve a publicly-known deadline, although there are clearly separation-of-powers objections one could make, too.

In addition, I think it's indisputable that, at the time, McCain's Republican rivals supported the surge but were also happy that it was McCain who was all the way out on the limb. Last February, someone in the Romney camp told me that yes, Romney supported the surge, but that "McCain owns the surge." The implication was that if things didn't go well, McCain would be the one to suffer; the other guys would be OK precisely because they didn't put it all on the line for the surge. So when I look at Romney's comments on "Good Morning America," I see a lot of caution and a bit of behind-covering, as well.

01/27 12:02 PM

I would think Republicans in positions of leadership would be smart enough to learn from the '06 election. It wasn't an antiwar mood that 'swept' Democrats to power, it was a lack of conservative action by RINO Republicans in office.

John McCain is the RINO poster boy. The only way he hould get our support is to keep us from having to endure a Clinton or Obama presidency. The Republic would never recover from that.

BTW: "Center Right"? Isn't that just a euphemism for "Socialist Light"?

I think the Democrats are contributing to McCain's
campaign. They may even be registering to vote in the Republican primaries.
Why?
They know they can beat him!
True conservatives will probably throw up their hands and stay away from the polls.