This thread discusses the Content article: REPUBLICANS DESERVE TO LOSE

Jack you are hitting the nail on the head once again. The shear arrogance of protecting one's pork and filling their individual coffers, blinds them from caring for and serving the public.

Like I mentioned on an earlier post, we need a new group of soldiers in there to replace this selfish do nothing crowd. There are obvious individual exceptions, but the general trend is in a downward spiral.

In memory of my good friend John Nehring,, who always lived by his principles, these guys and gals don't deserve to be elected!

I remember the same headline from 2006. The Republicans deserve to lose. What a tragedy. There are so many great ideas and solutions to the problems facing our nation that are being offered by conservatives. But from President Bush on down, the Republican party is absolutely incapable of explaining, promoting, or defending them. Like millions of other pro-life, pro-capitalist, anti-big government citizens, I am left completely uninspired by John McCain. How on earth is he the last Republican standing? How on earth is it that among all of the brilliant conservatives working in government at the state and federal level, none have come forward to lead the party? The national Republican party has been taken over by posers and opportunists who claim to share our beliefs, but plainly do not. Some of the true believers also have had other bizarre beliefs or just come across as too weird for public office.

2008 is going to be a Democrat blow-out. I don't care about the latest scandal involving Barack Obama - the American people are going to vote for him, hands down. As Dr. Wheeler pointed out last year, we are going to see a temper tantrum this November, and we conservatives better get used to being in the wilderness a LONG time. Our leaders have failed us. No one has stepped forward. The near future, at least, belongs to the Democrats.

short term pain for long term gain..... 1994 never would have happened if Slick Willie lost to GHWB.....

McCain is an a**hole who doesnt deserve our support nevermind our cash, lets just hope and pray that after a couple of years of unbound liberalism we can have another 1994 all over again....

keep hope alive !!!!

Michbris,

A ding to you my friend for nailing it. Excellent post!

Also, a ding to Jack Kelly for another spot on article that tells it like it is.

Keep up the great work Jack.

Thanks, Cephran.

Wait a minute; all is not lost yet. All we need is for the ragheads to jump the gun and do something stupid, or even attempt to do something stupid on our soil. (Or maybe the administration just tells us they attempted something?) Will Americans look to a slick-talking guy from Chicago with an Arabic middle name, who promises some nebulous version of 'change'; or will they look to the tried and true war hero for salvation from the islamist threat. Will they look for the latest version of 'peace in our time' because we can talk our enemies out of anything, including hating us? Or will they look to the closest version of 'give em hell, harry', the deeply flawed, but deeply patriotic, John S. McCain? Who would you choose?

I get the feeling Barack will be such an utter failure and do nothing president, and the country will be so much worse off that there will be a comeback for republicans in two years.

I just can't see him getting anything done, and his cabinet will no doubt be a freak show of socialists (like Clintons was) that it will be a never ending parade of gaffes and fools that the country will not know whether to laugh or cry.

This whole "change" BS reminds me of some idiot kid who challenges your warning not to stick a fork in an electrical socket. After a while it's more fun to just sit back and enjoy the show. And especially the ending.

I watched McCains prediction of the future today. Actually it was kind of funny because I didn't catch the begining. So for a while I thought he was talking about now, and had gone off the deep end. But his prediction will be so far from what will actually happen - mainly because in 2013, he'll probably still be a Senator. But a Senator with quite an embarrasing sound bite from 2008.

Not much can be done in today's sad reality, when local and national election for many became contest financed by public, private and corporate money and run under banner “You shall remember that you were born with hands bending torch yourself”

Just CRAP..........this ruins my weekend...

This is a nice segue to Jack Kelly's article. It appears the mistrust of the GOP is being substituted with a different faux conservative. I guess when you stand for nothing, you vote for nothing. The only saving grace; I don't see the Dems keeping these seats with Obama at the top of the ticket. I don't see these faux conservatives surviving with a Chicago liberal as their leader. Look for voter depression/suppression.

Democrats’ Hybrid Pickup Trucks
by Ann Coulter
Posted 05/14/2008 ET
Updated 05/14/2008 ET


On the very day of a special election to fill a vacated congressional seat this week in Mississippi, The New York Times accused the Republican candidate of running racist ads against his Democratic opponent.

Talk about dirty tricks! By The New York Times, that is.

The Republican thus accused of racism narrowly lost the election the night the Times article appeared, so I guess the Times can proclaim: "Mission Accomplished."

The ad in question, on behalf of Republican Greg Davis, pointed out that Barack Obama had endorsed Davis' opponent, Travis Childers -- another in a long line of fake-American goobers claiming to be "conservative Democrats," but who get to Congress and promptly vote to ban guns, surrender in Iraq and fund full-term abortions.

These days, I guess you can call yourself a "conservative Democrat" if you refrain from being sworn into Congress with your hand on a Quran.

The ad showed a clip of Obama's pastor g-damning America and mentioned Obama's recent remarks ridiculing rural folks for clinging to guns. It then concluded that Childers "took Obama's endorsement over our conservative values."

The Republicans had also run ads connecting Childers with other Washington liberals, such as Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry. (Times editors are still looking for the racist angle to those ads.)

To call that ad racist is a monstrous libel. Greg Davis and the Mississippi Republicans should bring a defamation action against The New York Times -- although such an action might be perceived as "racist" because some black people work at the Times.

Republicans are constantly linking the local hayseed Democrat to national liberals like John Kerry. The technique goes back at least to Michael Dukakis in 1988.

It is beyond outrageous for liberals to complain about the practice of linking Democrats to the national party when their calculated strategy in race after race in the red states has been to run Democratic candidates who appear to be Americans. They're not Americans. They're liberals! I don't care how much hay is sticking out of their straw hats.

In the 2006 midterm elections, Sen. Chuck Schumer and erstwhile ballerina Rep. Rahm Emanuel (now there's a couple of raw-boned Americans for you!) famously rounded up yokels from the local square dance contests to run as "macho Dems" -- as the Times admiringly called them. Schumer and the ballerina were hailed for their brilliant strategy to fool the hayseeds.

The phony blue-collar Democrats won their elections by driving around in pickup trucks and shooting guns, then moved to Washington and began voting against war in Iraq and in favor of taxpayer-funded abortions.

One of the Democrats' paragons of regular guy-ness that year was Jon Tester of Montana, who wore cowboy boots and had a buzz cut. The crew cut absolutely transfixed liberals in places like Manhattan. Search "Jon Tester and crew cut" on Google, and you'll get more than 200,000 hits. Even this tonsorial affectation was a liberal fake-out, inasmuch as Tester has no military service.

After campaigning throughout Montana in a pickup truck, Tester got to Washington and compiled a voting record more liberal than Chuck Schumer's, according to the liberal Americans for Democratic Action (Tester: 95 percent; Schumer: 90 percent). Tester also has a 100 percent rating from the pro-abortion group NARAL. There's your truck driving, gun-totin' Democrat.

Sen. Bob Casey Jr. was another consumer fraud perpetrated on voters in 2006 by the Democrats. Casey ran for office on the strength of his father's name and his alleged pro-life position. It was the pro-life position of his father -- the popular Democratic governor of Pennsylvania -- that disqualified Casey Sr. from speaking at the Democratic National Convention in 1992.

Despite rumors that Schumer had assured Hillary Clinton that Casey was not really pro-life, the good people of Pennsylvania made him their senator, throwing out Rick Santorum, the kind of pro-lifer who actually opposes abortion.

In Casey's first year in office, he voted in favor of an amendment to a foreign appropriations bill introduced by the fanatically pro-abortion Barbara Boxer that overturned U.S. policy against providing taxpayer money to groups that perform abortions overseas. It also granted overseas abortion providers taxpayer money. There's a "pro-life Democrat" for you.

In elections in the patriotic parts of the country, Democrats keep producing candidates that look like they're out of a Norman Rockwell painting but vote like Karl Marx -- which is to say, they vote like the typical member of the Democratic Party. Naturally, Republicans respond to this tactic by linking the local phonies to the national party.

As soon as the Democrats stop running these mountebanks, Republicans will stop exposing them as lickspittles for their liberal masters in Washington.