Watch at your own risk. As one reader writes:

…[this] counts as political waterboarding. I can never get those two and half minutes back in my life. … Some things you can’t unsee!”

Don’t say you weren’t warned.

This blog shall be held harmless for all emotional, mental or physical harm that comes from watching the aforementioned video.

Noteworthy excerpts:

The party of Ronald Reagan — a collection of social and fiscal conservatives — saw all their work come together with the Republican Revolution of 1994. Republicans came to power through their dedication to core, conservative principles.

and:

Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) noted in his CPAC speech that candidates must return to conservative principles if they hope to win. He pointed out several areas where Republican officials must return to their roots… to the principles that led to the Republican Revolution. In particular, Pence points to areas such as life, free speech, smaller government, and spending.

America can thrive under conservative leadership and government. The Republican Party is best equipped to deliver this kind of leadership, but too often, it has not. The time has come when conservative voters can no longer be taken for granted. For our time, effort, money, and votes, we need a pledge. We need a pledge from our presidential nominee to uphold the core Republican values that built this party, and which have taken a backseat to politics in recent years.

and also this final statement:

This year, my support comes with a very large string attached. I want my presidential nominee to pledge to support the Contract with Conservatives. If he does, then I will work for the nominee and encourage others to do so. But we must know that our hard work will be something. Lower taxes, smaller government, a commitment to life, support for free speech…. these are timeless issues, and Republicans should be leading the charge.

Me and 7600 other conservatives have already signed up.

How about you?

Noteworthy:

Gilchrest was one of two Republicans to vote last year for a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, which became a cornerstone of Harris’ challenge. Democrats slightly outnumber Republicans in the 1st District, but Gilchrest’s moderate views have enabled the GOP to hold the seat for nearly two decades.

He got about 33 percent of the vote, compared with Harris’ 42 percent.

Harris said he benefitted from a nine-month, $1.2 million campaign that highlighted his conservative credentials.

Harris ran on a pledge of “Consistent, Conservative Leadership.”

See his website for more info.

Some very astute observations/questions:

 McCain was outpolled by Barack Obama in Virginia – a historically red state – by 619,036 to 242,578!! McCain has so motivated and inspired the Republicans in this Republican stronghold that the Democrats outvoted Republicans by two to one!!

and:

What piece of twisted logic causes Republicans to delude themselves into thinking that he will have a prayer of competing against the younger inspiring Barack Obama? Obama is promising voters ambiguous “change” for change’s sake. He tells the masses that the government under Obama will solve all their problems (and they believe it will happen for free). How is it that conservatives think McCain will compete with that if he can’t even exceed a third of the raw vote in Virginia of all places? Virginia is not Massachusetts or New York.

This is what we’ve been saying. Anybody that thinks John McCain stands a chance against Barak Obama is, well, they must be working for the McCain campaign.

Bloodbath warning.

There will be blood.

Our pleasure.

Bombs away.

Let’s hear from him in his own words, and the words of John McCain:

SPIEGEL: Senator McCain, Europe is reserving a lot of hope for the next president of the United States. Will you try to win back trust in America around the world?

McCain: I know most of the leaders in Europe and other parts of the world and I have a long record of my positions and my ability to work together with our allies. I think I will start out with a level of credibility.

Translation: McCain: Today, Europe doesn’t trust the US. But you know me and you’ll be able to trust me.

SPIEGEL: America has lost a lot of friends because President George W. Bush angered, indeed outraged, them. He allowed human rights to be violated at Guantanamo Bay, and he dismissed the joint effort to combat global warming. Under a President McCain, could we expect a change of course?

McCain: Yes. I would announce that we are not ever going to torture anyone held in American custody. I would announce that we were closing Guantanamo Bay and moving those prisoners to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and I would announce a commitment to addressing climate change and my dedication to a global agreement — but it has to include India and China.

Translation: McCain: I agree with you. We’ve violated human rights at Gitmo. We’ll sign Kyoto. Unlike Bush, I pander to the desires of the Europeans.

SPIEGEL: So is America coming back to renegotiate the Kyoto Protocol?

McCain: I believe America is going to enter into negotiations to try to reach a global agreement. But, as I said, that agreement must include India and China, two of the emerging economies of the world. We would be foolish not to do so.

Translation: McCain: Yes, we’ll sign this treaty which will hold back American prosperity because I’ve bought into the unfounded hype about mankind causing global warming and I’ve ignored the experts that tell me otherwise.

SPIEGEL: Will America attempt to go it alone less frequently in the future?

McCAIN: Well, we all hope that America will be multilateral again in the future. There were times when the United States acted unilaterally, but I think we would all prefer to work in concert with our friends and allies.

Translation: McCain: We’ve been wrong for taking action to defend our national interest. In the future, when I’m President, I’ll make sure to submit our national priorities to European wishes.

SPIEGEL: When one makes inquiries about you in Washington, one hears that you sometimes lose your temper. Will America soon be getting a choleric president?

McCain: The fact is that it is simply not true. Second, I have worked across the aisle with the Democrats and with members of my own party in one of the most productive ways of any legislator. That would be impossible to do if there was any kind of problem in that area. And I have the support of so many of my colleagues who serve with me in the Senate.

Translation: McCain: They’re liars – all liars! I never lose my temper! I reach across the aisle and work with Democrats. That proves I don’t lose my temper! Next question!

SPIEGEL: You are reported to have screamed profanities at senators, and even though people think you have learned to control yourself, there are said to be moments when you cannot or choose not to. They call you “McNasty.”

McCain: It is an interesting theory, but it is completely false and orchestrated by my political opponents. I am not complaining about it, it is just a fact. Once again, my record indicates that I know how to work together to get things done with people on both sides and all parts of America.

Translation: McCain: Liars! All Liars! I know how to work with everybody in America – except those lousy conservatives.

SPIEGEL: Governor Schwarzenegger thinks that Republicans sometimes set the wrong priorities and that they are too slow on important issues like global warming and healthcare. Why did your party neglect these issues in the past?

McCain: I do not know. I have not neglected them.

Translation: McCain: I agree with Schwarzeneggar. We should have pushed more taxes onto industry so that we can pollute less. We should have pushed nationalized healthcare so that everybody can have poor quality healthcare. I’m working on those issues.

SPIEGEL: Because of assumptions like these,  some Republicans feel you are more of a Democrat than a conservative.

McCain: I am proud to be a conservative, and I make that claim because I believe in the most basic of conservative principles: That liberty is a right conferred by our Creator, not by governments, and that the appropriate objective of justice and the rule of law in our country is not to aggregate power to the state but to protect the liberty and property of its citizens.

Translation: McCain: I’m a conservative because I have a certain belief. Don’t judge me on the basis of all my cooperation with liberal Democrats and my finger-in-the-eye approach to working with Conservatives. I know I’m a conservative because of what I believe. Don’t judge my actions.

SPIEGEL: You often voted across the aisles and cut deals with Democrats. That made you suspicious to some.

McCain: My record in public office taken as a whole is the record of a mainstream conservative. I believe in small government, fiscal discipline, low taxes, a strong defense and judges who enforce, but do not try to make, our laws. I believe in social values that are the true source of our strength. And I believe, generally, on the steadfast defense of our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which I have defended my entire career as a God-given to the born and unborn.

Translation: McCain: I am a conservative as I define a conservative. True, I don’t support rule of law as it relates to immigration. True, I don’t defend free speech before elections. True, I hope we can tax American business out of profitablility in the name of global-warming hype. True, I refused to support Federal Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution to define at the Constitutional level that marriage is between a man and a woman. But trust me, I’m a conservative.

Of special note toward the end of the article is this rejected to-do list from one reader:

 ”Rejected to-do list:

– Lick a railroad track when its 20 below.

– Shoot my foot with a 45.

– Relieve myself on an electric fence.

– Stick my head under a running lawn mower

– Vote for McCain.”

Example: McCain and his cronies speak with a sense of inevitability about conservatives rallying around McCain.

For weeks, McCain advisers had spoken with confidence about the inevitable coalescing around their man once he became the presumptive nominee.

Example: McCain and his cronies (e.g. Lindsey Graham) talk about how John McCain will present “a conservatism that is not a threat…”

McCain, Graham said, will be able to present a “conservatism that is not a threat, that will be attractive to Reagan Democrats and independents.” It was a telling description. Just as George W. Bush‘s “compassionate conservatism” bothered some conservatives–aren’t most conservatives compassionate?–selling McCain as the nonthreatening conservative implies that other conservatives are threatening.

Example: McCain and his cronies talk about “working across the aisle” as though that were an accomplishment unto itself.

Moments later Joe Lieberman arrived. Some of the reporters hovering around Graham wandered over to Lieberman. The Connecticut senator, a former Democrat, said the key to a McCain victory would be his bipartisan appeal. “The important thing to win this election is to win the majority of independents and some Democrats. Senator McCain is a devoted Republican, but has always worked across party lines.”

And as another example of this mantra that “reaching across the aisle” is somehow a higher and more noble goal that actually advancing the conservative agenda:

“The most compelling moment in all this campaign in many respects–not all, many–was standing on the stage with Joe Lieberman,” he said. McCain highlighted his willingness to work with Democrats and touted his ability to work “across the aisle” as a strength. Conservatives, he said, appreciate it, too. “One thing I’m convinced of, without a doubt, is that conservatives are glad when Joe Lieberman and I worked together in establishing the 9/11 Commission and then moved and got many of their recommendations into law.”

Setting aside that specific claim (I’m not convinced he is right), McCain’s answer was interesting because it seemed to affirm the premise of the question. And one major difference between McCain and other conservatives is that he sees bipartisanship as both a means to an end and an end in itself. Most conservatives do not.

Example: McCain’s cronies try to remove CPAC attendees from their paid-for seats on the front row (conservative, CPAC attendees) for the sake of “congressmen who support McCain.”

As former senator George Allen spoke from the podium at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington last Thursday, offering his surprise endorsement of McCain’s presidential bid shortly before the Arizona senator took the stage, a McCain advance staffer in a sharp navy blue suit quietly approached the CPAC dignitaries sitting in the first two rows of chairs in the cavernous ballroom. “I’m going to need you all to move,” the McCain aide said. “Those seats are reserved for the congressmen and senators supporting Senator McCain.”

When the CPAC attendees did not move, a second effort was made:

And the equally difficult immediate task for the McCain aide was to move the CPAC VIPs–wearing “Diamond” and “Co-Sponsor” badges that indicated their relative importance–from their seats at the front of the room.

“I’m serious. Y’all have to move, now.”

Nothing.

“They’re for members of Congress.”

Still quiet. Then someone shouted, “We paid for these seats!”

All of which, shows a continued quiet (and sometimes not so quiet) disdain for conservatives and conservatism. Here’s a candidate that thinks he needs to dress conservatism up so that it is not “threatening.”

Yeah, that’s a strategy for victory.

We’ll look down on conservatives and dress up like liberals.