A Non-random List of Republicans and Conservatives
- Jim Leach, Former Congressman from Iowa
- Lincoln Chafee, Former United States Senator from Rhode Island
- Wayne Gilchrest, Congressman from Maryland
- Richard Riordan, Former Mayor of Los Angeles
- Lowell Weicker, Former Governor and Senator from Connecticut
- Jim Whitaker, Mayor of Fairbanks, Alaska
- Linwood Holton, Former Governor of Virginia
- Arne Carlson, Former Governor of Minnesota,
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State under Bush 43
- Douglas Kmiec, Head of the Office of Legal Counsel under Reagan & Bush 41
- Jackson M. Andrews, Republican Counsel to the U.S. Senate
- Susan Eisenhower, Granddaughter of President Eisenhower & President of the Eisenhower Group
- Julie Nixon Eisenhower, daughter of President Richard Nixon
- Francis Fukuyama, Advisor to President Reagan
- CC Goldwater, Granddaughter of Senator Barry Goldwater
- Rita Hauser, Former White House intelligence advisor under George W. Bush
- Larry Hunter, Former President Reagan Policy Advisor
- Bill Ruckelshaus, served in the Nixon and Reagan administrations
- Ken Adelman, served in the Ford administration
- Paul O'Neill, former Secretary of the Treasury under George W. Bush
- Lilibet Hagel, Wife of Republican Senator Chuck Hagel
- Jeffrey Hart, National Review Senior Editor
- Andrew Bacevich, Professor of International Relations at Boston University
- David Friedman, Economist and son of Milton and Rose Friedman
- Christopher Buckley, Son of National Review founder William F. Buckley & former NR columnist
- Andrew Sullivan, Columnist for the Atlantic Monthly
- Wick Alison, Former publisher of the National Review
- Michael Smerconish, Columnist for the Philadelphia Enquirer
...plus 25 Newspapers that Endorsed George W Bush in 2004
All of them apparently oblivious - or worse, uncaring - as to the true nature of the woefully inexperienced, terrorist-pallin' socialist who would put the country in grave danger.
Nope; I reckon they made sober assessments. Interestingly, no Democrats and/or liberals could be found who support McCain's campaign. At least, not when this list was published.
Wonder why not?
Reply to this
McCain does have Lieberman on his side, While Joe is technically not a Dem or a Lib, he does caucus with the Dems (at least as of this writing).
There has been considerable reporting, of unknown veracity, that Lieberman was on the short short SHORT list to be the running mate. The SHORTEST list.
Reply to this
Nixon aides? Reagan? Goldwater? Eisenhower? Bush and Bush?
I thought you wanted change?
Good news, everybody!!! Those supporting Obama will have nothing to carp about! Either their guy wins, or they get someone who all their enemies refuse to support!
So much for McCain being another eight or ten years (or whatever) of Bush. None of Bush's guys supports McCain.
It took two years, but they finally understand... :)
Reply to this
The change, you see, raymugy, is returning to a rational foreign and domestic policy, which is crafted by policy-makers and not petulant political operatives. Domestic policy which is not 'my way or the highway'. Foreign policy which has a few more dials on the board than 'allies' and 'targets'.
Speaking of foreign policy, you probably REALLY don't want to read this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amb-peter-bridges/we-know-the-world-and-we_b_137989.html
Reply to this
like I said, it took two years, but they finally understand...
thanks for making my point "more than a few dials on the board than "allies" and "targets" That's McCain - every time you try to attack, you affirm, I don't get it...
remember your guy wants to COMBINE the Allies and target buttons (Pahkistan at least - and he makes sure to be the only one in the room to pronounce it "Pah-kistan" roll your eyes with me, please; and if you believe J Jackson on Obama's behalf, Israel too!... if you don't believe J Jackson, he's not part of the campaign, then Pahkistan is the only one...)
Reply to this
"returning to a rational foreign and domestic policy, which is crafted by policy-makers and not petulant political operatives. Domestic policy which is not 'my way or the highway'. Foreign policy which has a few more dials on the board than 'allies' and 'targets'..."
I have to say, this is one of the reasons I am less concerned about who wins this election than some I have been concerned about in the past; both fellows tend toward this (these?) positions.
Of the two, however, I have to say that (from what I have heard) McCain would probably be better positioned on the "Domestic policy which is not 'my way or the highway' " front. I have heard less of the "I will demand sacrifices of you" or "we will have a volunteer peace force as well-funded as the military" stuff from McCain.
Keep in mind that, like you-all, I have no dog in this race who has a chance if winning. For me, it is all about getting the Executive and Legislative Branches to grind on each other a bit for four years. Giving light-weights like Pelosi and Reed any more easy influence over national policy than is strictly necessary for more than two years is asking for trouble. I will be generous here, and not put Obama in the "light-weight" category just yet. Until we do our homework:
Homework: take a brief survey of the major legislation** of both candidates, Obama and McCain, and see where they've crafted domestic policies, and with whom. That should give us a fairly good idea of how willing they are to "cross aisles" and compromise to achieve some general goal.
P.S. tell the Democratics that they should feel free to nominate better House leaders than Pelosi and Reed. Honestly; they shouldn't feel obligated to keep them.
** (setting aside this congress' personal favorite type of legislation, the "Special Proclamation of Fill-In-The-Blank Day-or-Month")
Reply to this
I could not agree with you more on the question of the Dem leadership.
I don't know what the problem is - I can only recall with bemused nostalgia that Reid was considered a great improvement on Daschle (which, sadly, he is).
The Dem leadership has the same problem as the GOP leadership - to get to BE in the leadership you have to have been around long enough to have pretty much calcified...how much more fun to have Majority Leader Tester or Webb; or Speaker Sestak.
Reply to this
"Homework: take a brief survey of the major legislation** of both candidates, Obama and McCain, and see where they've crafted domestic policies, and with whom. "
With honest respect to Obama, even that's a little unfair, given length of service advantage McCain has. If Obama falls short, it has less to do with the "143 days" canard and more to do with being a freshman gaining influence.
Homework: what major legislation did McCain introduce in his first term?
Obama is and will continue to make a fine leader - and will be a good figurehead for the US to get behind.
IMO, he is still a junior statesman, who knows how to learn from his seniors... The right side of the blogosphere tried to make hay at the 9/11 ceremony (rolling eyes). Total nonsense, they, but a sober viewing saw McCain's experience as a statesman come through in the receiving line -- not a small thing...
Soberly consider the Senate, IMO - as a Senator before he was a candidate - Obama would not have influence on Kennedy, Clinton, Reid and the old guard of his party when they were crafting policy. Realistically, does he even now?
But, McCain has influence on his party, and - as a Senator before he was a candidatee - was routinely taken into consideration by the leaders of his opposition.
Before the introduction of the us/them necessity of the campaign, that's how I saw it: the eventual Democratic candidate hadn't risen to a mature leadership role in the Senate yet, and the Republican candidate was a respected opposition leader the Democrats cooperated with. Now the Democratic senators CANNOT even pretend they respect McCain more than Obama for fear they will lose their positions in party. Such is modern politics.
in the interest of disclosure, I was craving a Clinton candidacy, I like her a lot as a statesperson. With the nomination of Obama, I felt the Democratic Party got it wrong... So, IMO, McCain - is a fine and established leader in the Senate who consistently worked with opposition to find solutions (McCain/Feingold, McCain/Kennedy, McCain/Leiberman) to complicated problems and issues. I don't see him as a litmus-test kind of guy.
Fortunately, with a Democratic congress keeping him in check, we can get through four years and elect Clinton or Obama (or Palin?) or someone else in 2012. The trick will be, in this modern world, for the loser to behave more as a Nixon in defeat than as a Gore in defeat.
If only... Gore had kept his mouth shut and quietly planned his return. We'd be looking at a record victory for him next Tuesday... the country would have a completely different feel to it right now...
Reply to this