I haven't posted in here in a long time, Tammy, but I'll post tonight.

I am a swing inddependent voter that has a streak of 7 presidents I've supported going back to the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan. The only president that got in without my support (when I voted) was Jimmy Carter, and I'll stand by my position that I am proud that I did not vote for this man back in 1976.

With this background and on Feb. 9, I'm saying tonight my view on the 2008 election with the 2 Dems still running, Obama and Clinton. If Obama somehow finds a way to get himself nominated, he has my vote locked up, and I did support Obama on Super Tuesday from my state of Illinois. If the choice is between Hillary and McCain, this will prove extremely difficult, but I would be leaning to Hillary as it stands tonight, but this can change and I could also vote for McCain if the Clinton machine continues to run roughshod and arrogantly over the American people. So in other words, the Dems have my vote this time if it is Obama as he is the only truly uplifting and inspirational candidate left in the race (as agreed to by many of my countrymen). The Dems may have my vote if it is Hillary, but they may not. Hillary is harmed big time in my mind with the presence of Bill Clinton, one of the most narcisstic individuals I have ever seen in public life, althought I suppose being elected to 2 terms of President can make someone quite arrogant which he is (and he did get my votes although the 96 vote I cast for him is one I would likely do over if given the chance versus Dole).

The politics of fear as practiced by the GOP will not work this election, and this helps feed Obama's support. I don't agree with many of his positions, but you know I don't agree with the others either on many of their positions as well. Obama's message of unity appeals to many, and frankly I dismiss as jaded the pundits who do not accept his message at face value. These are the people that Obama addresses with his remarks on unity if one listens carefully.

Some people say they do not know Obama or what he stands for, but these people aren't listening to Obama then when he speaks. He reveals a lot about what he supports when one pays attention. Obama has acknowledged we are at war, and he will prosecute in Afghanistan (for those that are listening, his dispute is with Iraq which is shared by many, he challenges the whole pretext of the current situation).

So I appear to be a member of the swing 5-7% of independent voters that once more will decide this election, and I will post again in October as we get close to confirm for your blog's record what I will do in the election to prove if I will make it 8 straight presidents I've helped support.

The ADULTS have spoken.

I guess sometimes we need a little tag on the earlobe, don't we??

I don't regret changing my party from DEM to REP in order to vote for Romney in the primaries. I doubt I will ever go back to DEM given the lineup of libs who represent my State of CA.

I posted a couple of weeks ago somewhere in this blog questioning why you & Ann would take such a stance to vote for Hillary against McCain. After listening to your past Saturday show, I actually called in and spoke to your producer but then got cut off. Maybe it was best that I did.

I wanted to just tell you that I understood your reasoning but it was still hard for me to comprehend. Recently somebody said there were 7 good reasons to vote for the most conservative candidate:

1.- The Supreme Court

2.- Supporting our troops to return with Victory.

Well, that's good enough for me, although the SHAMNESTY keeps me up at night. I can only pray the Juan McShame will chose a VP who will also tag at his earlobe.

Wishful thnking?? Maybe. All I know is that God does Bless America, so I have to trust God on this one.

Now that it is down to the Hill-Obama vs McCain.. there is no choice.

The top three reasons the GOP needs to be in the Whitehouse:
1. National Security: Duhhh
2. Business and Econonomics: GOP is much better than Taxaholic Liberals.
3. Judicial: With maybe 3 liberal Supreme court guys leaving in 4 years... this election will indeed change America as we know it if the wrong people are choosing their replacements.

This is tough. I am also willing to listen to ideas. Here is simple, and admittedly very limited activity I did last night. I let someone pick 3 issues. I copied a brief summary on their positions from a news source, attempting to take out direct clues as to their originator. Now many who have studies issues would know who said what, but I believe the many people done so. The results:

Out of three picks for best policy, Clinton two votes, Romney 1. This from a person who has never voted democrat in her life.

Now I know this is really just a little fun thing I did. But I do think it touches on a point. Speaking for myself, I am a true independent, with slight leanings toward the republican side. I am willing to consider different approaches. You know, NO ONE particular set of policies is necessarily right. Many have preferences and defend them fervently, but I think there is more than one way to go at forming policy.

VP selection. I've been thinking. Does that really change who John McCain is? It will certainly affect opinions, especially considering McCain seems likely a one term president from the get go. Conversely, if Barrack or Hillary pick a middle ground VP (is that possible?), how does that affect their chances?

OK, so why, after an initial support of John McCain, would I go back to him after turning so negative on him? I believe I started listening and thinking, and realized his personal style, approach to people, and self control were not what I want in a president. Yes, as a moderate I consider a candidates personality, judgment, and reaction style to challenges

I admit, my decision is far from over. It will be interesting when both parties settle in with the full tickets to see how things shape up. I am open to hearing opinions.

I really appreciate that you're sharing your struggle with us, Tammy. It makes me feel less alone and insane with my own angst. I share your respect for Ambassador Bolton and his endorsement does carry weigh. I'm reading his book right now and he's an extraordinary man.

All that being said, my ultimate decision will be based on McCain's choice of vice president and the feeling in my gut as the election grows closer as to whether or not McCain really is open to the concerns of conservatives.

Thanks again for letting us be a part of your process.

Many of us have struggled with this question, and it is only natural that as a thinking, principled person you should do the same, Tammy. But the alternatives for national security, the economy, and the Supreme Court are too terrible to contemplate. We must go with McCain, and concentrate our efforts on seeing to it Huckabee does not get the VP nomination. Randy

A man can be measured to some degree by the people with whom he associates. He has the right judicial and foreign policy advisors on board. Economics? Who has his ear there?

Larry Kudlow just mentioned on his radio show that McCain would bring back the Perot Republicans. I guess I am one of those. We shall see. He will get my vote unless something crazy happens between now and Nov. But today, I cast my mail primary ballot for Mitt.

Hey Tammy, and other bloggers -

I am a Conservative Republican, and was a FredHead, then Romniac -- I have to say that I have concerns about McCain being the nominee, but first and foremost, we must support him because of the Terrorist Threats -- I feel that a mushroom cloud in the US will most likely happen if Hillary/Obama were President. I also think that the terrorists will fear McCain -- that's what I want - the terrorists to have fear. So, I'm voting for McCain.

Bolton, concise and brilliant as usual.

We've all agonized over this. My conclusion is we're stuck with McCain and the Republican Party like it or not. I'm pessimistic about Republican chances in November. Things have deteriorated so badly any Republican nominee would have been at a huge disadvantage.

I take no comfort in accepting McCain. If he runs an insufferable campaign, I will pass on voting for him. I have misgivings about him as presidential material notwithstanding the political context. He is a vindictive man prone to rage. Politically, there is a real chance a McCain presidency may do more harm than good for the future of Republicans. There are still conservatives who say concede the next four years to the Democrats because McCain will do the movement great damage. I believe it will take a miracle to deliver the Presidency to McCain. One miracle may lead to another, who knows, so I won't go hide under the blankets just yet.

McCain will be better on national security and the war on terror. It may be worth everything else to hold on to that for four more years.

We're at the beginning of a long struggle. This isn't just one of those political rifts you often get in democracies. This is whether America survives or is radically changed from her founding principles. It's more than liberalism vs. conservatism too. There will be in-fighting among the various conservative factions as to what constitutes true Conservatism. Brace yourselves.

Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession. ---George Washington

i was for mccain the whole time, even when people were saying he's nearly out. he was a pow for a long time and that's good enough for me. if he chooses huckabee or giuliani i'll write my own candidate in. i'll never vote for filthy clinton.

Your comments are well taken, Tammy. I too am deeply disappointed with the endorsements of people like Bolton and Olson.

The way I look at it, because they are so well connected inside the beltway, they have deep and profound distrust of Clinton and know things about her that evev you don't know. They don't have to endorse anyone. Edwards and Richardson didn't. I I don't think Bolton et al are just being good foot soldiers.

Personally, because of my age, I believe I've seen the best of this country. The water underneath the frog is roiling and just about to begin boiling. I could not live with myself if that frog boiled to death because of my vote. That's why I'm sitting it out.

If you must vote, vote for Obama. He's such a little boy he couldn't do any harm. No, I don't share your rosy view that somehow he will change.

Discuss this with Dr. Laura. She's always good for some worthy advice. Of course, you run the risk of having her be a McCain supporter, too.

After the amnesty debacle last summer, I truly thought McCain's presidential aspirations were dust. I am just as surprised as anyone to see him actually on his way to being the nominee. I have even wondered exactly what I would do in November and ran a few different scenarios through my mind.

And then I heard Barack Obama's speech Tuesday night.

When Obama speaks of 'change' I am concerned. The change he and Hillary Clinton want in this country will change the face of our nation forever - and that does not translate to 'better'.

Obama went on to speak of the 'hard sacrifices' we would have to make in order to have 'change' come about. Lovely imagery: all of us working together to build a better nation, but what will those 'hard sacrifices' be? More punitive taxes and regulations? Selling out our troops to the UN at some point? Expanding the federal government's role in, well, everything? Taking away the freedom of choice in the healthcare we receive? Allowing Iraq, our troops and our nation to suffer with an immediate withdrawal (per Obama)?

Shall I continue?

And Clinton, for her part, has promised to garnish the wages of those who refuse to partake of her super-deal on healthcare. Some choice there! It also goes to show that wealthier Americans will once again be punished for making good financial decisions by having to foot the bill for everyone else or the Clinton machine will make them pay dearly.

I also do not want Hillary Clinton thinking of me when she gets up of the morning wondering if I have healthcare or a job. Even prior to going to university, I had no problem filling out my own resumes and working 2 jobs when I had to while attending classes full time. It was tough at times, but it was also one of the most positive experiences of my life. I have accomplished much so far and I'm not done yet. Guess what? I've done it all without the help of Obama, Clinton, McCain or any piece of legislation.

A Clinton or Obama win will invite government into our lives in a manner we cannot even imagine. That is not a far-out statement whatsoever. They have promised 'change' and they intend to do so! You can count on that!

Are there issues with McCain? You bet! It is unfortunate he has not used all his time in the Senate to build a resume that would assure conservatives he will be the leader he promised in his CPAC speech. He left some items untapped, but I, too, must admit I was more impressed with him 2 days ago than I thought I would be.

With that in mind, I cannot - in good conscience - put Clinton or Obama in office by not voting at all OR by voting for the Dem nominee. The changes they want for America will never be reversed, and I'm not willing to risk all that has been fought for so one of these two can instill policies that will fail our nation just as it has other regions of the world.

We know we are going to have a bumpy ride with McCain at the wheel, too. We're just going to have to make sure we sleep in shifts in the backseat so he doesn't allow his pal Teddy to have a turn at the wheel for a few minutes in the middle of the night.

Perhaps we should each ask ourselves these 3 questions when considering who we will vote for: 1) How many people have been thrown into the gulag because of Big Government? 2) How many people have been slaughtered as a result of Big Government? 3) What would Reagan do?

I am a right of center Independent. But in the spirit of full disclosure, I am currently a registered Democrat because I wanted to vote for Joe Lieberman over Ned Lamont in the 2006 Dem senate primary in Connecticut.

That said, I was for Giuliani from the start. But seeing how badly be messed things up for himself showed me that his strategic instincts were lacking. So it's better to find that out sooner rather than later.

In the CT primary, I voted for Obama over Hillary because (while I disagree with many of his positions) I see him as a quality individual. But I do see him being a bit too inexperienced for the big job. I do NOT see Hillary as a quality individual. And her propensity to calculate EVERY word and action for political reasons is transparent and insulting. Only the real sheep can believe she has any credibility at all.

So what do I do in November? If it's Hillary vs McCain, the choice is easy: McCain. If it's Obama vs McCain, I want to see how Obama's positions have evolved and gauge his potential for continued growth. So I'd say there is a chance I'd vote for Obama, but it is more likely that I'd go for McCain.

Part of it comes down to the people around the candidates. Obama's political "Rabbi" is the odious Dick (Our troops acted like nazis) Durban. McCain's supporters include Lieberman, Giuliani, and the great John Bolton. That matters a LOT to me.

But the jury is out. Obama has a chance to earn my vote, but right now in an Obama/McCain contest, the chances are about 75% that I'd go for McCain.

As a former Rudy supporter, I will vote for McCain in November. However, I think that conventional "wisdom" is wrong - McCain will get pulverized in the general election.

Would McCain make a lousy President if by some wacko miracle he got elected?? Hey - ask me a hard one! Given his inside-the-Beltway mentality, his fascist dream to control free speech, his lunatic views on global warming, his open-borders mentality, his arrogance and his famous hair-trigger temper how could the result be any different?

A McCain administration (should that happen) would be heavily dependent upon MSM goodwill, since that is his most powerful constituency by far. In his defense McCain supporters point to his record on holding the line against government spending. To that I would answer: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Remember how fast he flip-flopped on spending to save his steroid-enhanced political neck? What is the difference exactly between Ahnald and ex-Gov. Davis these days? Mavericks, "moderate" Republicans, the MSM-anointed "saviors" of the GOP, rock-star status - the parallels between McCain and Schwarzenegger are eerie. We all know how much McCain cherishes his "maverick" status, which is MSM-speak for Far Left activism. What makes people think McCain is immune to an Ahnald-style conversion?

After all that, why would I even consider voting for McCain? My answer is: for the same reason that falling face-first off of a 10-story building is "preferable" to falling face-first off of a 110-story building. The Democrat Party’s virulent hatred for the US military is well-established. Given McCain steadfast views in Iraq - the only issue that I think he will not waffle on - the nation might survive a McCain presidency (the GOP won’t, but that is another story for another day). I am not so sure about Obama or Clinton, who are determined to carry out al Qaeda's bidding in Iraq. Whatever else one can say about John Boy - and I can say a lot - he has stuck to his guns about winning in Iraq. And it would be fun to play the chickenhawk card against Obama or Clinton in November, even if there is no chance that McCain will win.

As for McCain attracting "moderates" in November, we would do well to remember an old truism in American politics. When confronted with a Democrat and a near-Democrat running for public office, voters almost always prefer the candidate with the "D" after their name than the one with the "R".

As a Conservative Republican, was a FredHead, a Rudy Fan, and then Romniac; I must support McCain -- the reason is simple -- the terrorists want weakness, and that is Hillary and or Obama -- McCain is not weak in this aspect. I'm not a one issue voter, but this ONE ISSUE trumps everything. If a mushroom cloud comes on Hillary/Obama's watch, everything else will be moot.

You wrote:

"Bolton is not a man who endorses someone out of 'compromise.' He doesn't have to."

First of all, what does this statement mean? No human being, no matter what level of integrity is exempt from circumstantial compromises at least once in a while.

Second, if I heard his message on this video correctly, the entire subtext of his message was exactly this: "COMPROMISE!"

While you ratchet up your self reflection, hang on to your keen insight. EG: Did Bolton address the gnawing question of McCain's commitment to fighting terrorism beyond Iraq? The answer is no.

CONNECTICUTBRUCE: Don't be taken in by the Obaminable Snowjob Man. Don't believe because he is a charming, decent person, he surely will recover from his naivete. Obama is the darling because he declares himself to be a Progressive. He is the frontman the hard Left has been waiting for. It isn't about Obama, it's about The Obama Generation.

Tom Hayden pretty much sums it up

But today I see across the generational divide the spirit, excitement, energy and creativity of a new bidding to displace the old ways. Obama's moment is their moment, and I pray that they succeed without the sufferings and betrayals my generation went through. There really is no comparison between the Obama generation and those who would come to power with Hillary Clinton, and I suspect she knows it. The people she would take into her administration may have been reformers and idealists in their youth, but they seem to seek now a return to their establishment positions of power. They are the sorts of people young Hillary Clinton herself would have scorned at Wellesley. If history is any guide, the new "best and brightest" of the Obama generation will unleash a new cycle of activism, reform and fresh thinking before they follow pragmatism to its dead end.

Many ordinary Americans will take a transformative step down the long road to the Rainbow Covenant if Obama wins. For at least a brief moment, people around the world -- from the shantytowns to the sweatshops, even to the restless rich of the Sixties generation -- will look up from the treadmills of their shrunken lives to the possibilities of what life still might be. Environmental justice and global economic hope would dawn as possibilities.

Is Barack the one we have been waiting for? Or is it the other way around? Are we the people we have been waiting for? Barack Obama is giving voice and space to an awakening beyond his wildest expectations, a social force that may lead him far beyond his modest policy agenda. Such movements in the past led the Kennedys and Franklin Roosevelt to achievements they never contemplated. [As Gandhi once said of India's liberation movement, "There go my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader."]

We are in a precious moment where caution must yield to courage. It is better to fail at the quest for greatness than to accept our planet's future as only a reliving of the past.

So I endorse the movement that Barack Obama has inspired and will support his candidacy in the inevitable storms ahead.

Looks like Colin Powell is struggling as well:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/02/08/intv.powell.undecided.cnn

I liked Bolton at the U.N. I think we need more U.N. ambassadors with his assertiveness. His endorsement helps to justify my previous decision to vote for McCain. When he is elected we will have to keep an eye on McCain. He has a tendency to veer left when under stress and we will have to do what we can to counter that tendency. Maybe a Republican Congress will help.

IMHO, Conservatives are publicly getting behind John McCain to show the same party unity that Governor Romney so eloquently showed the other day.

We may not like the choice America has given us, but consider the alternative.

For God's sake, consider the alternative.

National Security is my Number One issue, but perhaps even more important than that is the Supreme Court appointments. Do you really want the MOST liberal member of the Senate making THOSE choices? (Or, for "Hillary", substitute "One of the most...")

Obama seems to have the wind at his back, and there is no doubt that he gives an exciting, inspirational, and eloquent speech.

And says, Absolutely. Nothing.

The man is Bill Clinton without the substance.

Unless we get behind the alternative--and if he's able to put his legendary vindictive temper aside and actually asks Mitt to be Veep, it'll make the choice much easier--America is in for a World Of Hurt.

Fight On, Tammy.

And may I say what a pleasure it is to read Blog comments that are so thoughtful and eloquent, as opposed to perhaps better known sites polluted by the Leftastic Nutroots (oops...! Was that an "attack"?)

As a former FredHead, I am indeed wrestling with myself over what to do. I realize that November is a long way away and so much could change between now and then. I have been listening to people I respect and whose opinions I trust and value (Tammy, Michelle, Fred, Bolton, etc.) and haven't yet decided what to do or whom to support. I do know that McCain's choice of VP will have a lot to do with my decision.

Politics is rarely pure. It is, most often, a choice between bad and less bad. As a Catholic, I thought long and hard whether I could in good conscience vote for Rudy, whose position on abortion is anathema. I knew, however, that he stood for non-legislating judges and that was about as much influence as he'd need to have on the abortion topic.

Fast forward several months when McCain puts his whole reputation on the line for the surge and as the surge goes, so does McCain's political fortunes. [Hey, Tammy: whatever happened to that sidebar of the sunbathing nude guy with the sombrero covering his privates? What did you call that? McCain Death Watch? Keep watching.]

Do you ever really doubt what McCain is for? No! He's not double-talking slick. He's forthright. He may be wrong. He may not always agree with me 100%, but I never doubt where he stands. He plays politics like hardball. Do you think he withstood 5 years at the Vietnamese's hands, taking regular beatings within inches of his life and still bearing their scars, to think this stuff will get him? It won't! He's 10 feet tall and bullet proof!

What makes one a conservative? Strong on national defense, pro-life, low taxes, less government intrusion into one's private life, strong on 2nd amendment liberties. HE'S GOT ALL THAT.

This cult of personality has got to stop. Mitt, on paper, shoulda had the vote locked up. So what happened there? He came off as phoney. For the average voter -- the vast majority of America who don't listen to talk radio, read the political blogs endlessly and consider politics their pasttime -- McCain has bridged the authenticity gap. He's a sonuvabitch, sure, but he's our sonuvabitch.

Perhaps having him opposed to the strong conservatives in the party will keep him honest: just like was done to Bush on things like Harriet Miers' nomination and the illegal immigration dispute.

Oh, and, that Gang of 14 stunt actually got people like Alito, Janice Rodgers-Brown and others who would've been filibustered, onto the federal judiciary, while still preserving the filibuster for those in the minority [us now] to use when appropriate.

There are 3 Democrats left standing....Clinton, Obama and McCain. All are troubling as Clinton and Obama represent the Socialists while McCain represents Democrats who will not even vote for him in the election.

I have zero confidence that McCain will select a strong conservative running mate, or will stand by any of the pandering comments he made at CPAC.

This election will be a disaster for the GOP which they deserve after squandering the opportunities they had in controlling the White House and Congress.

It's like punishing a child for being bad....in your heart you hurt, but you pray in the long run, they'll learn from the experience.

Hmmm...

Whose opinion carries more weight, Ann Coulter or John Bolton?

Hillary says she'll sign legislation beginning our surrender in Iraq within 60 days. By simply announcing this, she's given hope to al Qaeda, prolonged the war, and cost more American lives.

Some conservatives find this acceptable, but John Bolton and I don't.

McCain will kill jihadists. For that he's got my vote.

In a perfect world John Bolton would have been Sec. of State instead of Condi Clueless Rice. The way Bush refused to fight for Bolton was another example of the way he folds like a cheap camera in the face of left-wing opposition.

When is enough - ENOUGH!
I gave the Bush family 12 years and now the Republican party wants me to give 4 more.

Let be candid about John McCain and his support for illegal immigration.

The taking away of our rights as citizens, ignoring if not abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Government:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring and investing the power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. (thank God for the stead fast conservatives who jambed and shut down Washington's telephone switch board and LET THEIR VOICES BE HEARD)

Refusing Assent to Existing Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. (just look at what is happening in Arkansas with infectious diseases)

Exciting domestic insurrections amongst us. (we need citizens protecting our borders)

Abdicating Government, by declaring us, the citizens, out of the Protection and by waging War against us, instead of illegal immigrants. (the U.S. border towns are like war zones)

Anyone care to add to this list?

When is Enough - ENOUGH!

Unless McCain has a sincere road to Damascus revelation, and Mitt Romney endorses him, I will never even consider offering my support, let alone my vote. I will continue to support Mitt Romney until he officially drops out of the race and endorses someone. To the best of my knowledge, to suspend is to cease for a period; to interrupt; to render temporarily ineffective. The convention is a long way off and anything is possible.

Today I gave my 5 1/2 year old grandson his own copy of the Declaration of Independence and there was something special for me when he paused asking the meaning of certain words and explaining what was said.

Let me share an improvised version that surprisingly a 5 year old understood.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness -- whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.

When it becomes necessary for people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them to one another... When a long train of abuses and the exercising of authority or privilege, following without ever changing the same contempt that shows a design to reduce the citizens to live under absolute authority, it is my right, it is my duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for my future security...

When is Enough - ENOUGH!

Dear Tammy:

While I share your high regard for John Bolton, perhaps we should all take a moment to reflect on two things: Bolton supports McCain, no doubt in large part, because McCain is orders of magnitude superior to Clinton and Obama in matters of national security and democracy. Imperfect to be sure, frequently taking gleeful and perverse delight in kicking Republicans and conservatives when they were down, or merely when they didn't see things exactly his way, and indeed, he has a mean and vindictive streak a mile wide, but then again, so does Hillary (orders of magnitude greater than his), and as has often been said (and I parphrase here), he may be a bastard, but he's our bastard.

And isn't it interesting, and tragic, that Bolton stands head and shoulders above so many in large part because he thinks highly of his country and is unafraid of defending her to the world? Is it not bizarre that in his position as ambassador to the UN, he was very much out of the ordinary for vigorously expressing and defending the interests of the United States?

That being the national and world climate, no wonder so many are so confused these days.

Whose opinion carries more weight, Ann Coulter or John Bolton?

Bingo. That's exactly right.

I'm more than a little surprised at how fast some have turned on their heroes (Bolton, Fred!, Ted Olson, Norman Schwartzkopf, George Allen, Phil Gramm, Steve Forbes, etc. etc. etc. etc.) who actually KNOW McCain and have worked with him. Yet they hang on the words of the conservative media as if it were gospel. Mind-boggling.

I'm happy to see that Tammy is rethinking her initial instinct to question others' judgment in endorsing him. And it's not just "closing ranks" for unity; John Bolton could skip endorsing anyone if he wanted to. I certainly don't think anyone would expect him to make an endorsement. He had the option to say nothing on the matter, and he chose to give his support.

As have I.

" One of the most ghastly acts was the massacre in the city of Damour, where thousands of Christians were slaughtered like sheep. They would enter a bomb shelter and see a mother and father hiding with a little baby. They would tie one leg of the baby to the mother and the other leg to the father and pull the parents apart, splitting the child in half.
A close friend of mine became mentally disturbed after they made her slaughter her own son in a chair. They tied her to a chair, tied a knife to her hand, forcing her to cut her own son's throat. After killing him they raped her two daughters in front of her "
Brigitte Gabriel , author of " Because They Hate "
describing what Islamic fundamentalists do when they invade and conquer.

For me, the war against Islamofacists will be the foremost issue I will base my vote on. All others are irrelevant if we are slaughtered out of existence. As we all have seen but too many have forgotten, they can come over here and unleash their jihad upon us and murder not only thousands but possibly millions. And go about it in the utmost savage beast way.
I respect John Bolton but his endorsement as with anybody else means nothing to me. John McCain gets queasy at the thought of putting a few drops of water down someone's nose and making them uncomfortable for a couple minutes. John wants to shut down Gitmo. John want to give would be murderers a ' fair trial '. We are at war for our survival. I want someone who will look these monsters in the eye and see them for what they are and KILL them, not take them prisoner.
The three candidates left don't impress me in putting America first ahead of their agendas of being the likable , popular person. I can say right now I have no idea who I'll be voting for come November. Sad.

Response to Beth who posted earlier. Disagreeing with someone's opinion is not "turning on" them.

Also, Conservatives don't need the words of the media to hang on, to form a negative opinion of McCain. He gives us plenty to think about on his own.

He promoted amnesty for illegals. He abridged free speech with McCain-Feingold. He opposes waterboarding terrorists and wants to shut down Guantanamo. He supported John Kerry. He opposes drilling in ANWR (so we can't access our own oil and displace our mid east oil consumption)and supports massive spending on the global warming swindle.

McCain voted in favor of using taxpayer funds to harvest stem cells from human embryos. If that technology showed any legitimate promise, there would be no limit to the private funding it would receive. Taxpayer funding for things the private sector deems unprofitable, is just sucker money.

McCain called Samuel Alito too conservative.

McCain was considering running on a presidential ticket with John Kerry.

Conservatives are righteously discontent with McCain. There is no one to blame for that, but him.

2008 Feb 09 Sat

Tammy, I waited on the phone for over an hour tonight and didn't get on, but then, you were really on your game tonight! Well, I had so many things to say, I could almost have started my own talk show. But here's the deal.

I agree with you on soooo many things, but there are still several areas where I must take issue. I do so not in any strident way, but because these are just my opinions.

I have watched each of my favorite candidates drop from the tree like leaves in the fall until there was just Romney left. Then he, too, fell, and the tree is now bare. It is truly the winter of our discontent.

I heard Romney's speech at CPAC on the radio, with some advance notice that he was going to announce dropping out. His doing that, along with his reasons, demonstrate once again, between him and Huckabee, who holds the conservative leadership card. Huck has remained in as a lib in conservative cloak in order to divide the votes of the latter in favor of the former, whose side he really takes. Meanwhile, Romney went into super-T actually in the lead in delegates--the only measure that really matters--and rots-o-ruck finding that in the lib media, whose darling in the R party was whichever of Rudy and McC was in the ascendant at the moment.

If Huck had any regard for conservatism, HE would have been the one to drop out, in favor of Romney, and he would have done it BEFORE superT. Instead, he doggedly stays in the race, dividing the conservative vote so that McC gets win after win with barely a third of the vote, with Huck carping at Mitt, and supporting or staying silent on McCain's trangressions the whole time. If Romney and Huck had combined forces, we would today be looking at a demolished McCain campaign, on its last thread, if not already withdrawn. The same would not be true had Romney dropped out in favor of Huck, who is actually favoring McCain.

And just BTW, I would have been glad to vote for Rudy if he had panned out, even though he's never been my first choice.

Back to leadership. Tammy, I object to your blaming Fred and Mitt for withdrawing, although I was sorely distressed to see them quit the race. The blame for our current dilemma lies squarely at Huck's feet for not withdrawing long ago. But part of leadership is knowing when you're beaten. Fred realized his campaign wasn't going anywhere, and wanted to stop splitting the conservative vote as early as that became clear. For Mitt to have fought on after Tuesday would have been a fool's errand (one which Huck now assumes). Mitt recognized that this phase of the fight is over; that, as conservatives, we've lost the battle, but not necessarily the war; and that we now need to put our efforts in other directions in order to achieve the best final result.

As for Huck, much as I would like to see him continue to stick a thumb in John's eye, that eye is now way above his reach. He can go after the remaining delegates until he's blue in the face, but he has no chance whatsoever of catching McCain. So he is actually just mopping up more second-place delegate votes to try to force himself into the VP slot after successfully running interference for McCain. He is likely to find himself with a face full of curb. Unlike W, John hasn't shown much regard for loyalty--just look how much he's done lately for us!

So we enter a new phase. Now, McCain, Chosen of the media among Republicans, will suddenly find those same media dredging up the Keating 5, his short temper, 'Does this man have the temperament to be president?', etc., etc. (which of course, they would NEVER do to Hillary!). They will make Swiss cheese of him in short order. If anyone thinks the NYT will endorse McCain in the gen. election over Barack or Hill, I'd gladly take your wager, but for my compunction against taking advantage of fools.

For our part, we must, as you say, absolutely NOT fold our tents, but loudly declare what it will take to win our votes. VP selection is key, because McCain is nearly certain to be a one-termer, so his VP will be his heir-apparent in 4 short years (as opposed to the 8 we might be facing if the Clin-toons get back in there). This is one shred of hope he could toss us. Choosing Huck will guarantee McCain a loss. I'm with you completely on that--I will write-in if it's a John-Mike ticket. Choosing the right person will give him a fighting chance. I think Michael Steele would be a smart move, especially if the Dems go Clinton-Obama, as looks likely, but maybe as a Marylander disappointed at Steele's loss to Ben Dip-s Cardin in the race to succeed retiring Sen. Sarbanes, I might be biased. There are many others who would make fine choices, and there are many who would not.

Second, he has to convince us that he will reverse his lib-tilt of late and really embrace more conservative stands. (Your caller tonight who pointed to John's 83% lifetime conservative rating needs to be reminded that in the last few years that number has been falling, and is now at 67%. And that using one number to characterize a candidate is like playing the stock market by looking only at technicals, while ignoring business models and other corporate fundamentals.) This will be a steep uphill battle, as he has proven almost as slippery as the Clintons. At this point, mere words from him carry very little weight. We'll need something more substantial to seal the deal.

And in the upcoming Potomac Primaries, I will be voting for Romney here in Md, as I encourage anyone who can to do also. Neither McCain nor Huck should be encouraged any further in the remaining primaries and caucuses. I would positively delight in a Romney 2nd, Huck 3rd result going into St. Paul.

Oh, and as for those out there who think the Reps are just playing on fears in the War on Terror, WAKE THE TRUCK UP! Read Catch-22--Yossarian knew that it isn't paranoia when they ARE actually trying to kill you!

And on a purely silly note--did anyone notice that the big 5 Republican contenders all had 4-letter first (nick)names? Fred, John, Mike, Mitt, Rudy.

Tammy! I totally understand how you feel. It's just not a good time for conservatives.It seems like the Dems are happier with their nominees than we are with ours,and it shows when you look at the voter turnout numbers. I,too, admire John Bolton and I am somewhat disappointed when Republicans like him and Ted Olson,come out in support of McLettuce. But I was just reading a blog about the CPAC convention and doing so helped me to better understand where John Bolton was coming from,as far as his endorsement of McLettuce. After I finished reading the blog,I came to the conclusion that many of those same Republicans that are backing McLettuce,are doing so more for national security,than for anything else. It's obvious that John Bolton has major disagreements with McLettuce on several issues,but the overwhelming concern is national security. Read the blog and see for yourself!

http://redblueamerica.com/blog/2008-02-08/cpac-blogging-john-bolton-endorses-mccain-warns-bush-north-korea-863

Tammy, I haven't posted it but I respect you enormously.

I came to this conclusion at CPAC and I have railed hard against McCain.

We have no choice. It's an anti-Obama vote.

The damage a bad President does is incalcuable. We are still mopping up after Dhimmi Carter and will be for decades.

We must get behind McCain -- for SCOTUS alone (I don't hold out much hope for much else)

Another insider makes a realistic plea for a vote and for support for John McCain. First, it was Senator Tom Coburn. Now, it is Ambassador John Bolton. The Ambassador does a good job and made a good argument for John McCain, as Ambassador Bolton went through you-know-where in his nomination process, and so he knows Senator McCain, and views him as an ally. His speech abut the Senator from Arizona and request for his support were well though out, reasonable, and pretty open. Ambassador Bolton, as Senator Coburn did before, makes a good, honest, gracious assessment of John McCain, and the ambassador's request for support sounds logical....

The problem I have, is, Senator McCain hasn't changed his views towards the amnesty deal, nor any of his other anticonservative decisions in the last 8 years. He said in his speech to the CPAC that he respects other conservatives' and my beliefs and opinions, and that's all well and good, but "respect" by itself doesn't cut muster. McCain himself said oh-so-indirectly that, though there have been differences between himself and conservatives, he is basically going to stay the same, the political "Maverick" who shoots his own guns, and pretty much told the conservatives to either join him or not. This is what I took and understood from McCain's speech to CPAC. It seemed contrite, it seemed that he was asking to be accepted by conservatives, and it seemed that he was being humble and inviting, but while the sneer wasn't there, and the swagger was lacking, McCain was basically telling conservatives he wasn't going to change.

With respect to the Ambassador (who ought to be running for POTUSA himself) and Senator Coburn, as well as Senator Thompson, Governor Schwartzenegger, and Mayor Giuliani, as well as the rest of McCain's supporters, I cannot vote for nor support the man now. IF he becomes the GOP nominee (and Governor Huckabee is showing he still has some fight left in him and bhis campaign), I will not support him in the general election, and I will carry through with either writing-in or voting third party.

If John mcCain wants to get my vote, wants to have my support, in my opinion, he must stop the talk, cease having others speak for him, and show some ACTION that he truly has come home to the conservativism he knew prior to 2000. Until he does, he will not have my vote now nor in November...

Bolton rocks. Such a shame there are so few of him. I was a Fredhead, however..

There not much of a decision to make here, or least not for me. For the sack of our love ones serving in the military we cannot let the rats back in the White House. We just must not allow it to happen.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

Tammy Blog Posting Rules:

No profanity.
No personal attacks.

Comments do not necessarily reflect the views of Tammy Bruce.