I think it could best be described as a “hissy fit.”
Ah. I see. :rolleyes:
That’s funny-his positions on waterboarding, the Fisa court warrants, and Guantanamo show me a strong will on the fight against terror. Fighting fire with fire only leads to more people getting burned.
Just another voice chiming in to say that McCain, as a pro-immigration hawk, is innoffensive to neoconservatives. A lot of pro-life evangelicals love him. He really is the candidate of the normal Republican.
It’s the abnormal Republicans who hate him.
The KKK wing find him insufficiently racist; he adopted a darkie girl & is insufficiently inhuman to wetbacks.
The Bush family attack dogs (this includes Limbaugh) hate him as a rival of their so-called “Republican establishment.” This probably corresponds to a desire in the Bush/Romney wing to keep populists who never went to Ivy League schools out of power, not that talk radio would ever admit that.
Also, that he challenged the Leader of the Party at all in Time of (eternal & undeclared) War marks him as disloyal, not a good [del]Communist[/del] “Conservative” & someone that [del]Uncle Joe would have made a non-person in the good old days[/del] is to be destroyed by any means necessary, Scientology-style.
And of course, there are a few isolationists who hate that he’s actually willing to fight in Iraq, but that’s more a Democratic thing right now.
Sorry, you’re wrong.
Now there’s an argument in the finest tradition of Great Debates.
Hey, why waste time and space, right? I get right to the point. 
No, you don’t.
The way Rush explained it is that any of the three would be a disaster as president, and so they’d rather pin what they see as the coming apocalypse on a Democrat.
Populist? John McCain weren’t born in no log cabin. He’s the son and grandson of Navy admirals and an Annapolis graduate. You can’t get much more establishment than that.
:dubious: pkbites, didn’t you used to be a police officer? Trained and indoctrinated to, you know, respect the rights of suspects, never use brutality, follow the rules, never make an unwarranted search, all that sort of thing? I would expect you to understand on a deep level the widespread apprehension people have about this administration’s demanding the freedom to use torture, wiretap without warrants, hold prisoners indefinitely without charges or access to the courts or counsel and without even the protection of POW status under international law, and so on.
You’re comparing civillian law enforcement to dealing with enemy combatants? Apples and oranges.
I have a question. I have a question:
It seems to me that the Dopers who are the most perplexed by conservatives that don’t like John McCain, are those that I suspect will vote Democratic no matter who the Republican candidate is.
So why do some of you seem a bit put off by our disdain of a pol you probably won’t vote for either? I don’t get it.
You are aware, I hope, that most of those held at Guantanamo have not been enemy combatants, let alone “terrorists”? That the admin eventually had to release most of them? That they would not have been held at all if the standards of basic police work had been applied to their cases?
Because the vast numbers who apparently find John McCain unacceptably liberal shows just how radical and inflexible the conservative movement has grown and how far right the goalposts have been dragged, and that’s not good for the country.
I disagree.
Oh, we’re not put off. Confused perhaps. But put off? The idea that large segments of the GOP base will not only not support McCain but may even support a center-left Democrat out of spite is not something we’re exactly upset about.
Good to see you’re keeping up to your usual standards of analysis and argument, but in any case I think your question is answered.
What, I have to prove I disagree with your statement?
Opposing tax cuts that are not accompanied by corresponding spending cuts is the conservative position. Tax cuts without spending cuts (especially in a time of war) is not conservative.
If you don’t get that it’s weird for rightwingers to talk even semi-seriously about supporting Hillary, whom they long ago branded the Wicked Witch of the West, you must be seriously dense. That’s what the put-offing is about; we couldn’t care less how you feel about McCain.
Other than Ann Coulter who exactly said they’d support Hillary over McCain? Not me.
I’ve said in other threads that I wouldn’t vote for McCain and that if that means the Democrat wins, so be it. But that is not the same as supporting the Democratic candidate, as I would also not vote for them.
Come the general election I will probably find myself voting for a third party or writing in my own name. But I cannot vote for McCain. This is not the same as supporting Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.