Does conservatism mean one massive deficit after another? Certainly as a fiscal conservative I see no difference between “tax and spend” and “tax cut and spend” if it means fiscal irresponsibility and budget deficits.

Does it mean the destruction of the idea of subsidiarity? Have we decided that big government is good - and that that governance should be done as far from the problem as possible?

As a Christian conservative (but not particularly a social one) - does it mean torture? Are we going to mimic President Clintion with the lame “well, it depends on how you define torture”? Does it mean the violation of all known definitions of the concept of Just
War in the invasion of Iraq; and then the pathetic prosecution of that war until the last year? While it is both illegal and immoral for us to leave Iraq until there is a stable government and competent army to maintain order - we need to reflect on whether the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was ever the right thing to do.

Does it mean the abrogation of law by spying without a warrant? Holding prisoners without trial? Rendition to avoid the inconvenience of American standards for the treatment of captives? Does it mean the refusal to execute laws legally passed by the legislative branch because the executive branch doesn’t agree?

Conservatives really do deserve to lose this election for allowing those who now call themselves conservatives to capture the mantle of what conservatism is.

Hugh somehow combines the desire for purity existant on the wonk side of the party, without the self-defeating willingness to throw an election to be on the side of the angels.

I voted for Romney on Tuesday, I’ll vote for McCain in November (despite the fact that Obama or Hillary will destroy him in Illinois).

Unfortunately for us, the conservatives both got aced and aced themselves right out of the party as the rank-and-file east of the Mississippi took the core message to drive the conservatives out to heart. Romney ran as a third-termer, and had all of the flip-flop issues we savaged the last candidate from Massachussets for. Thompson was singularily uninspiring to those with attention spans that do not allow for a reading of War and Peace (sadly, most of the country). The evangelicals attempted to foist a liberal in Christian clothing on us in Huckabee. Now, we’re stuck with a candidate that would rather put a 500-lb bomb on us than shake our hand.

As for the future delegate count, I went through the next 2 weeks’ worth of contests involving 9 contests in 8 states/districts/territories, and there are, depending on whether one wants to count the “unpledged” delegates in Washington’s caucus and dependent on result of Louisiana’s primary, between 219 and 258 delegates up for grabs. Except for those 18 “unpledged” Washington caucus delegates, 10 pledged ones from Washington’s primary tied to the statewide vote, and the 6 up for grabs in Guam’s caucus, all of those are some form of winner-take-all; 69 by Congressional district (4 of those) and 135 or 155 in 5 or 6 (respectively) statewide/DC-wide WTA contests.

Democrats are going for “young” and “new”. Something Republicans seem unable to take note of.

And with McCain telling us to “suck it up” and take one for the team, makes my head hurt even more than it did last night. Maybe McCain needs to “suck it up” and do one for the team. Like act like a conservative Republican and not act like one of the three musketeers standing on the podium with Joe Liberman and Lindsey (you are all racists) Graham.

To which brother Huckabee replies, “Why not? I shall do as you say but for a price my after the deadly dead is done partner in crime.”

After the deadly dead is done, the Lord God descends upon the two schemers & betrayers, and asks McCain, “Where is your able brother Romney?”

“I don’t know,” McCain replied. “Am I my brother Romney’s guardian?”

Then God said, “What have you done? Your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground! So now you are cursed [with alienation] from the ground that opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood you have shed. If you work the land, it will never again give you its yield. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.”

One way or the other Reagan would have distanced himself from a politician such as the present-day McCain. Reagan would have made McCain look like faux “conservative” milk toast that he really is.

McCain is going to lose in November - the only question is how badly.