The answer is, I found after much soul searching, right in the masthead of Stacy McCain's "The Other McCain" website AT THIS LINK
"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler
If this code of conduct is the one the master lives by then it is good enough for me and surely, no one, especially Stacy, could find fault with my response based on the values he sets for himself.
Stacy launched a full bore attack on the doyen of princely conservatism in blogging, ("Legal Insurrection"
AT THIS LINK) Prof. William Jacobson. a once and still Gingrich supporter, from Cornell Univ. for this statement ;
Should the race come down to Santorum or Romney, I’d have to think about it, as shocking as that may sound given my criticisms of Romney. That’s not so much a vote of confidence in Romney, as it is an uneasiness with Santorum.
McCain found this statement unacceptable and advised, in return ;
"I said bluntly several weeks ago that, if the fight for the nomination comes down to Newt vs. Mitt, I’m for Mitt.
Newt Gingrich simply has too much baggage, and to nominate the twice-divorced Gingrich would be to throw away the “family values” argument altogether.
Whatever my problems with Romney, and they are legion, he has at least stuck with his first wife and run a competent campaign."
It is clear the grass roots don't want Mitt,social conservatives don't want him,the rock ribbed southern states like South Carolina, and shortly Georgia don't want him. he can't beak 35% in the nationwide polls for all his money and his "next in line status". I would be confident that if he does get the nomination many of those folks, and myself, will simply vote down ticket-even if Palin begs everyone to vote for Romney, and even if she were on the ticket as VP.
However, that is a choice I and others will make based on Romney's history, flip flopping, character and yes his religion. All these points can be argued with validity on both sides as can the, perhaps, crunch one, of gifting the election to Obama by not voting.
What is not valid, sorry Stacy, is voting for Romney because he is faithful to his wife. That is absolutely no measure of the fitness for the office as history shows.
Unfaithful To Their Wives Presidents
Faithful To Their Wives Presidents
Bush 1 IKE
Bush 2 Jefferson
Clinton and twice married Reagan (which is the clincher)
The unfaithful presidents on this list were serial cheaters and are considered,as a matter of opinion of course, to be amongst the greatest, or at least the most effective presidents.
Of the monogamous team little can be said. To advise one would vote for Romney against Gingrich on some moral "family values' standard, without allowing for the possibility of Newt's conversion to Catholicism and repentance is just plain wrong. Wrong from a fellow Catholic, wrong on historical grounds and, well just wrong.
I feel that what has happened here is that the truly terrible state of the Republican party is now distorting the minds of even the finest of the conservative commentators. If the campaign continues right up till the election with the same cast of characters the party will suffer an ignominious and well deserved defeat.
I believe only a new entrant, and not the ridiculous concept of Jeb Bush being the 'White Knight' to save the situation, (if this poll is any indication it has put paid to the silly idea). I see Palin as the person who could unite the warring factions but someone else of her stamp would do the trick, perhaps Jindal, but something must be done or we are all done.
When a great mind like McCain's is reduced to a specious argument by the foul winds from an ill campaign it is time to look to a new start before it is too late.