Bob Barr?

[sirs]

And yet, despite this unprecedented heroic action, Gingrich was despised by nearly everyone and thrown out by his own party: out of the leadership and out of the House.

LOL,..... and your redefining & distorting history refutes the facts presented that the GOP under Newt brought about a balanced budget & fiscal discipline, ........ how again??  Here's a hint.....he wasn't "thrown out" for bringing fiscal responsibility & discipine to DC.  Quite the contrary

[Xavier_Onassis]

But the fact is that Newt did something so execrable that his own party threw him out. I bet you even know what it was, but just don't want to say.

[sirs]

Sure....the same thing that largely had the Democrats circling the wagons around Bill, and don't you dare try to "throw him out".  Still doesn't refute the FACT of fiscal discipline the GOP under Newt brought to DC

[Plane]

>>You don't demand uniformity of opinion from Republicans do you?<<

That's a fair question.

No, I don't. I do demand adherence to core principles of the party. McCain has gone way off the path on some of the central ideals of Conservatism. Which is his absolute right. He seems to enjoy playing the maverick. The problem is demanding that others do as he says, not as he does, is exceedingly egotistical and just plane wrong. If he can do his own thing, he should shut up and let others do there's.

I think his chance of being elected  depends on his record and peoples expectations.

I don't expect him to act as a perfect conservative , he never has  , are a lot of people expecting something unrealistic ?

Arizona Republicans have re-elected McCain even though he is no Goldwater , what he really is is his own .


I don't see him demanding the way you do , could you elucidate?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Sure....the same thing that largely had the Democrats circling the wagons around Bill, and don't you dare try to "throw him out".  Still doesn't refute the FACT of fiscal discipline the GOP under Newt brought to DC

==============================
Hey, I didn't throw the Newtster out, his own party did.

FACT my butt. How long did this FACT last? Maybe one year?

Newt is very bright, but he is also the most annoying American political leader for decades. He is even more annoying than Bob Dole or Spiro T. Agnew. Before the Newtster, REpublicans were only known for being against everything. His Contract thing at least got people to think they were for something. Of course, their biggest FOR was term limits, and that never passed.

The FACT is that anyone who votes for a Republican expecting fiscal responsibility is exceedingly gullible. Not with that stupid war Juniorbush (America's most fiscally irresponsible president) mongered and refuses to end after all these years.

McCain will need to refute Juniorbush or spend the next four years golfing, and of course, speechifying to corporate droids for big bucks.

The big issue is will McCain try to continue his fame as a "straight talker", or will he sell the last remaining shard of his soul and look the other way while the 527 assholes pump the airwaves full of the racist drivel that we have begun to see posted here by our knee-jerk "conservatives".

Those pictures of McCain hugging Juniorbush will be hard to refute. After the evil crap that Juniorbush's flunkies pulled on him in the primaries, somehow he ended sucking up to him most shamelessly.

[Plane]

"After the evil crap that Juniorbush's flunkies pulled on him in the primaries, ...."


You think McCain shouod suffer again for these?


BTW they mostly were figmints of Democratic imagination , the picture of the McCain Family that was supposed to offend the racists of S.C. for example... was from the McCain website.

[sirs]

Sure....the same thing that largely had the Democrats circling the wagons around Bill, and don't you dare try to "throw him out".  Still doesn't refute the FACT of fiscal discipline the GOP under Newt brought to DC
==============================
Hey, I didn't throw the Newtster out, his own party did.

Precisely.  Apparently 1 of the parties has a lack of tolerance for such immoral behavior

FACT my butt. How long did this FACT last? Maybe one year?

How about the duration of Newt's congress.  When was the last time a Dem run congress balanced the budget??  Without tax increases even??

[Amianthus]

Hey, I didn't throw the Newtster out, his own party did.

Nobody "threw him out" - he was re-elected in his district, but decided to not take the office for another term. As far as I know, he's still a member of the GOP.

[_JS]

I seriously doubt Bob Barr even makes McCain's short list. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say that this is a tactic of lowering expectations. I'm sure there is a far more acceptable conservative for the voters at large. Barr ranks down there with Phil Gramm or Tom DeLay on a likability scale. Whispering this rumor is a good strategy for whomever he selects people can say, "at least it wasn't Bob Barr!."

I think you need to look at what is hurting the GOP right now and what McCain's weaknesses are.

1. He's an old man. Plus, the GOP is rather well known for its old white men (Bob Dole, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld).
2. They've completely lost the plot on fiscal discipline and McCain isn't known for that either.
3. Militancy - good for some voters, not great for others.
4. Will absolutely never win without the Evangelical vote. McCain may or may not bring them to the polls.

So who fills those voids?

I think you've got some good possibilities.

1. Mark Sanford: Governor of South Carolina - 47 years old, he fights his own party on pork-barrel spending in the SC General Assembly.
2. Mike Huckabee: Don't think I need to add much, good person to pull in crucial Evangelical voters
3. Norm Coleman: Senator from Minnesota - good Senate worker, understands how to work with Congress, more of a practical choice
4. Thad Cochran: Senator from Mississippi - Easily replacable in Mississippi and doesn't carry the baggage of Barbour.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Nobody "threw him out" - he was re-elected in his district, but decided to not take the office for another term. As far as I know, he's still a member of the GOP.
==================================================
He was removed from the office of Speaker, and not entirely because of his various and sundry pecaddiloes: there are lots of Republicans he rubbed and continues to rub the wrong way. He is a smartass by nature, even if he is smart.

He decided not to take the office because...?
Don't you suppose that he was taken aside and told what might come to the surface if he did take the office?
There was some sort of a scandal over a book he wrote as his marital flings.

I don't think the GOP has actually thrown anyone out since David Duke.

[Amianthus]

He was removed from the office of Speaker, and not entirely because of his various and sundry pecaddiloes: there are lots of Republicans he rubbed and continues to rub the wrong way. He is a smartass by nature, even if he is smart.

He was not removed from his position as Speaker, either. He remained Speaker until he refused to sit for the seat in the election he had won. Since he didn't arrive to take his position in the House he was therefore not eligible to become Speaker. It's entirely possible he would not have been re-elected by the GOP to the position of Speaker in 2001, however, they never "removed" him from the position, either.

A number of Republicans blamed him for the losses the party took in the election of 2000, which was the reason why he resigned.

[fatman]

I seriously doubt Bob Barr even makes McCain's short list. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say that this is a tactic of lowering expectations. I'm sure there is a far more acceptable conservative for the voters at large. Barr ranks down there with Phil Gramm or Tom DeLay on a likability scale. Whispering this rumor is a good strategy for whomever he selects people can say, "at least it wasn't Bob Barr!."

I think you need to look at what is hurting the GOP right now and what McCain's weaknesses are.

1. He's an old man. Plus, the GOP is rather well known for its old white men (Bob Dole, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld).
2. They've completely lost the plot on fiscal discipline and McCain isn't known for that either.
3. Militancy - good for some voters, not great for others.
4. Will absolutely never win without the Evangelical vote. McCain may or may not bring them to the polls.

So who fills those voids?

I think you've got some good possibilities.

1. Mark Sanford: Governor of South Carolina - 47 years old, he fights his own party on pork-barrel spending in the SC General Assembly.
2. Mike Huckabee: Don't think I need to add much, good person to pull in crucial Evangelical voters
3. Norm Coleman: Senator from Minnesota - good Senate worker, understands how to work with Congress, more of a practical choice
4. Thad Cochran: Senator from Mississippi - Easily replacable in Mississippi and doesn't carry the baggage of Barbour.

This is going to sound off the wall JS, but what about Bob Gates?  He probably wouldn't bring the evangelicals, but as far as integrity goes he's got a lot of it.

[sirs]

I think you've got some good possibilities.
1. Mark Sanford: Governor of South Carolina - 47 years old, he fights his own party on pork-barrel spending in the SC General Assembly.
2. Mike Huckabee: Don't think I need to add much, good person to pull in crucial Evangelical voters
3. Norm Coleman: Senator from Minnesota - good Senate worker, understands how to work with Congress, more of a practical choice
4. Thad Cochran: Senator from Mississippi - Easily replacable in Mississippi and doesn't carry the baggage of Barbour.

I'd add JC Watts to the mix

[Xavier_Onassis]

A number of Republicans blamed him for the losses the party took in the election of 2000, which was the reason why he resigned.

---------------------------------------
So he threw a hissy fit, took his baseball, and left the game?

[Amianthus]

So he threw a hissy fit, took his baseball, and left the game?

Or, he took responsibility for his own actions and resigned. Call it what you will.

Either way, he wasn't "kicked out."