Also via Insty, Bob Krumm is right about one thing: he just doesn’t get it.

I don’t get it. Sure, John McCain has disappointed me on some issues. But what elected official hasn’t? Besides, we’re Republicans, not loony Kossacks who froth incoherently every time one of their party doesn’t behave exactly as they demand. No one is going to vote precisely as I would all the time.

John McCain is far better than either of the Democratic candidates, and better even than some of the Republican ones–perhaps even including the one whom all the “conservative leaders” seem to be rallying around.

I won’t bother listing the principle-based objections to McCain, for they are legion. And besides, Karl and Jeff already did that, pretty much. And quite ably, thanks. Bryan says:

I really wanted to see two things tonight. I wanted to see Romney take the fight to McCain and earn the front runner spot. That didn’t happen. Romney came off well but I doubt the fundamentals changed. The other thing I wanted to see was some sign that McCain was ready to be a leader and be a less irritating figure than he has been up to now. That didn’t happen either. His “I led for patriotism, not for profit” line is a slap in the face to business. A slap in the face to business, and from the presumptive nominee of the pro-business party? Who does he think he is? And where does he think his own money came from? It came from his wife’s father, who presumably led for profit, not for patriotism.

His dishonest attack on Romney’s war stance, captured above, just signals that he’s the same old McCain.

I’m now in the position of having come around to like Romney. He’s decent, smart and fair and I think he would make a fine president. And I dislike McCain all over again. He’s a smarmy beltway insider who just lied to everyone who was watching while he smeared a good man, flipped on his own awful legislation and belittled free enterprise. This man wants to lead the party of Reagan?

“Honest” John McCain, far from being “better than either of the Democratic candidates,” is quite possibly the worst choice for President any Constitution-revering American could ever make. But hey, he’s got an “R” after his name in the papers, so have at it, RINOs. You’ll forgive me, I hope, if I don’t clap my little hands, shriek for joy, and jump right in your hellbound handbasket.

And speaking of which, here’s more unctuous Chicken-Little smarm from you know who. Bill’s got my answer to that mindless crapola all cooked up and ready for consumption.

Shit. Sandwich.

No. Thanks.

Update! Steyn on McMaverick.:

I’m getting a bit tired of Senator McCain’s anti-business shtick. The line about serving “for patriotism, not for profit” is pathetic. America spends more on its military than the next 35-40 biggest military spenders on the planet combined: Where does he think the money for that comes from?

As for his line about “some greedy people on Wall Street who need to be punished”, aside from being almost entirely irrelevant to the subject under discussion (the subprime “crisis”), it reveals, I think, one of the most unpleasant aspects of McCain. For a so-called “maverick”, he’s very comfortable with the application of Big Government power, and the assumption of Big Government virtue. Undoubtedly there are “greedy people on Wall Street”. Why should he and his chums be the ones who decide whether they need to be “punished”? If greed is to be punishable, why doesn’t he start with a pilot program applied to, say, the United States Senate and report back to us in five years how that’s going?

Primary triumph doesn’t seem to be doing anything to mitigate the small and graceless side of McCain.

I’m getting a bit tired of the Republicans generally, and their “where else are you conservatives gonna go?” attitude, myself. You “centrist, moderate” doubledealing bums have a lock on our votes for exactly as long as we agree to bleat along with your atonal drone like the rest of the sheep, and not one minute longer. And in November, you’ll get another reminder of that.