Redstate

I hope you're right, but only if it sets up a Giuliani vs (insert conservative here) race, not if it gives a clear path for the liberal.
--
It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones. -- Calvin Coolidge

If the GOP keeps catering to these RINOS, McCain, Newt, Rudi, Mitt, etc, I hope and pray for a third party with a truly Conservative person to run as candidate.

I fear they would NEED a third party just because the RINOS are likely to garner so many crossover Dims voting in the primaries, like crossover Dims put McCain back in office in Arizona!

But I'll vote write-in, before I vote for these guys are for anyone else with their views.

A smart strategy for the Republican Presidential candidates would be to get to the right of Bush on immigration. The conservative base has strong feelings on this issue.

I would say the average Republican cares more about immigration than abortion.

If Giuliani comes out strongly as an "enforcement first" conservative, he could pick up a lot of support from people who would otherwise dismiss him for his more liberal social views.

"Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich. "

William F. Buckley, Jr.

What is a Republican in Name only anyway? Its a Republican PARTY after all, not the Republican movement. The GOP should allow anyone who wants to come in IMO.

I think these two candidates are interesting because they are the two get the most unfair knocks.

Note that I am leaning towards Romney, and I am not a fan of McCain.

Though I oppose McCain, I feel compelled to defend him as a conservative. True, he has a sad tendancy to kick his fellow convervatives- he's an onery fellow. Also he stupidly supported the restriction of political speech in the McCain-Feigngold monstrosity.

Still, he has consistently voted conservative on cutting spending, abortion, and gun rights. He also usually votes conservative on tax cuts (though not always for sure). He also is consistent in his support for the War on Terror, and the War in Iraq- although his support sadly seems to come in the form of attacks on other Republicans.

The first of his flaws I might forgive- McCain-Feigngold I cannot. That said, if he wins the primary I will vote for him in the general.

Some of these attacks are merely overstatements of legitimate concerns, for example: Romney is recently getting attacked as governing pro-abortion. While Romney campaigned for governor as personally pro-life, but supporting pro-choice politics- his actual governing record on the bills that he vetoed or signed is overwhealmingly pro-life. Things like this are what makes me feel that Romney's conversion to a more solid pro-life position is trustworthy. Certainly there is room for some legitimate critism on this point. I also think the Romeny Health Care Plan is open for critism.

On the other hand I have been very disturbed by the recent increase in attacks on Romney's religion. I notice that this has been particularly urged on by Sullivan- who uses the old MSM trick of claiming to be an article predicting attacks as a way to try and create those attacks. I find it very disturbing that secular forces are trying to entice evangelicals into attacking Romney's faith. No longer satisfied with merely suggesting that evangelicals will attack Romney's faith they are now listing specific attacks that they are "predicting" will be made. This includes things such as posting pictures of temple garments (Mormons wear sacred garments under their clothes to remind them of their promises to God- such as being chaste, and obeying God's commandments). Of course the posting of these pictures are only being done to "predict" what the evangelicals will do- no disrespect intended. My attitude is that any time you start posting pictures of people in their underwear you are not intending to be respectful.

Here's Althouse's take: http://althouse.blogspot.com/2006/11/can-romney-endure-media-exposure-th...

Sullivan's defense is further undermined by the fact that a vist to his webpage shows about half of his recent postings are on Romney's religion- including attacks such as "racist"- all in the name of "predicting" future attacks.

(The fact that Wonkette is now picking up on the story is also a stamp of disrespect).

I am confident that the majority of Republicans and conservatives will reject this less than subtle plan.

Perhaps these attacks on Romney will be helpful- as the old saying goes "If you want to know what kind of man a person is, see who his enemies are."

I really do believe that Romney could be best one of our best choices..if you look at all the things he has over come they will inspire you...you should all watch his video about him on his PAC website and understand that theres never going to be a perfect republican..no one thought an actor from cally could become a president and i think he turned out pretty well..for the VP spot i would have to pick huckabee...i have no taste for mcCain.

Erick, while I appreciate the focus of this article on McCain and Romney, and the fact that whoever will win the primary will most likely have to run to the right of W, I think some pretty key aspects of each man has been glossed over in order to make this comparison. I would say they are much more different than they are the same...

Romney didn't have an opinion on the immigration bill in back in March, so that means he's "keeping his own council" and has "refrained from going further"? But what about in April, the very next month, when he came out in support of a guest worker program that is stronger than the Senate bill? Romney said he would like to see the illegals registered and documented, those who have committed any crimes immediately deported, and begin a path towards citizenship for those who are "here paying taxes and not taking government benefits". That's just a touch to the right of Johnny Mac's legislation on the subject.

In addition, Mitt declared in September that he supported a building of a fence or a wall along the entire border, beef up National Guard forces on the border until the wall is built, have stricter penalties for employers that hire illegal aliens, and said that securing the border is the first step in good border policy. Again... just a slight bit to the right of Johnny Mac on the issue.

Your assertion that he has "refrained from going further" on his immigration stance is a lie.

On issues of the war, Romney has again positioned himself far to the right of Grandpa John. He came out against McCain's anti-"torture" bill, he has more eloquently expressed our reasons for being in Iraq and the reasons we must stay than Bush ever has, and has made other strong moves to the right regarding the war on terror (see his Jihadists/Understanding Your Enemy speech, his calls for wiretapping mosques, and the Iranian/Harvard kerfuffle).

Again, to simply assert that he has the same position on Iraq and the War on Terror as does Johnny is misleading to say the least.

And to wrap up with this assertion is just bad reporting:

"The problem is, at the substantive level, both Governor Romney and John McCain have thus far echoed similar positions on a host of issues from immigration to the war."

In all actuality, they could not be much more different from one another and still both be Republicans.

--------
Sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing are the same. -The Fray, "All At Once"