Here is a conservative blog that warms to McCain...at least vs. Romney.
_________________________________-
Endorsing John McCain (And why not?)
What has this to do with Ronald Reagan?
By Mark Kilmer Posted in 2008 | McCain | Republican nomination — Comments (79) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The choice is no longer of which man; rather, it is of what actions.
Over at NRO, radio talker Mark Levin invokes Ronald Reagan when attempting to really conservatives to the cause of Mitt Romney. He talks of the heartbreaker in '76, when the future President lost the nomination to the sitting President – in my best Carvey-doing-Brokaw voice – Gerald Ford.
I remember in 1976, as a 19-year-old in Pennsylvania working the polls for Reagan against the sitting Republican president, Gerald Ford, I was demeaned for supporting a candidate who was said to be an extremist B-actor who couldn’t win a general election, and opposing a sitting president.
I was eleven in Pennsylvania on primary day, working the polls for a local Republican candidate. With a gleam in my eye that morning, I beseeched voters to "remember to write-in Governor Reagan." Perhaps it was my age and sublime cuteness which brought a different reaction from folks. I was told that the governor was the "change we needed" and "an honest man who would stand up for America." The revolution was underway, and it made me smile, though my heart would break that summer Kansas City when the CBS reporter told the viewing publican that my man Ron would be "too old" in 1980. Of course, I didn't know it, but he was almost instantly planning his 1980 run.
But what does this, what does Ronald Reagan have to do with Mitt Romney? Read On for our answer. …
A: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. He enters the picture elsewhere.
We all know what Mitt Romney is saying now, as opposed to what he said before, and before that, and before that… and so it goes. With Ronald Reagan, we knew what we were getting; with Romney, we get the right words said to the right audience at the right time. That and a federal bailout of the automobile industry and the largest proposed demand-sided "stimulus" package which won't stimulate will get you, if you throw in some money, an ice cream cone from lefty ex-hippies Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield. (Folks, I'm not dissing the ice cream. Perhaps if someone would have taught me how to make ice cream at Penn State, as happened with Ben & Jerry, I'd be able to fund my own Presidential campaign and none of you would need to ask who is the real conservative.)
McCain has been accused of lying when he reported that Romney discussed a Timetable for withdrawal from Iraq while others were talking about winning the war with the surge. It is documented, and this is how it was reported at the time: Here, from ABC News, April 3, 2007: Romney Embraces Private Iraq 'Timetables'; And here, from The Hill newspaper, April 4, 2007: Romney advocates non-public Iraq benchmarks ["timetables and milestones"]. Now, McCain, on Meet the Press with Tim Russert Sunday, differentiated between Romney's call for a timetable for withdrawal and that of Hillary, who had a date certain for beginning the withdrawal and thus was advocating surrender.
There is the specious argument that McCain has not won any primaries by a huge margin. Romney hasn't won any which was contested or in which he wasn't seen as Governor George's son promising to save the automotive industry with taxpayers' largesse. These primaries have all been tight in this uptight, condensed primary season, and Romney has outspent everyone anywhere with very little to show for it. Let's see what happens Tuesday.
To be sure, John McCain is not consistently conservative on every issue; in fact, he's remembered by many conservatives for the issues on which he is somewhat wacky. But that being said, he is certainly more conservative than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, and quite possibly he remains more conservative than Mitt Romney. And for a Republican to be Hillary or Obama, he'll need to win a large number of moderates and non-Republicans. John McCain has shown that he can do that.
I am putting aside whatever bad feelings John McCain has generated in my heart. (Life is way too short for that sort of corrosive contempt as it is. Trust me.) I am a Republican, and my party is not a few primaries away from nominating the late Nelson Rockefeller or the bloated corpse of his ideology. It's John McCain, possibly the only Republican in the field – save a hypothetical, energized Fred Thompson – who could successfully stand astride Hillary's inevitability and shout: "You're going to do this my way, you little creep, or I'm going to…"
Ronald Reagan would not have endorsed Mitt Romney. In fact, I'm pretty sure Ronald Reagan didn't leave a Hari Seldon vid for us to view. John McCain will be our nominee, and there are certain indicators which lead me to believe that Ronald Reagan would want Republicans to back the Republican. Let's do it, okay? If it's going to be Hillary Clinton, it is personal.
The actions will become clear as the race becomes focused.
redstate.com |
