Philip,
The problem is that McCain is RIGHT NOW embracing Brownback and
touting his support, and is still in a race against Huckabee
(except, of course, that he is tag-teaming WITH Huck against
Romney). And there is no way whatsoever to read Romney's remarks
the way McCain is reading them. None. I stand by my charges of lies
and hypocrisy on his part. What gets my goat so much is that McCain
has made a career for eight years now of claiming to put forth
nothing but straight talk, and the media has let him get away with
it, but he is one of the most vicious prevaricators around. (Again,
ask should-be-Judge Jim Haynes.)
As for the robo calls, I hate to say it, but I don't believe the
Politico these days. (Unless it is a story by new hire David
Rogers, the best in the business.)
Now, on to a far more temperate, thoughtful, well-reasoned analysis
of McCain's problems: The Examiner's editorial page editor, Mark
Tapscott, a Reagan man who worked under legendary Reaganite Lyn
Nofziger, has a
brilliant post on his blog this morning.
Finally, for what it is worth, my two favorite non-home-state
senators in the whole country during the mid-part of this decade
(until they lost) were Rick Santorum and Jim Talent. Smart,
principled, solid conservatives. Both of them are with Romney. I
trust their judgment.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.