I am officially vindicated. Earlier in the summer, the lineup for the convention came out, and all the Real Republicans were fit to be tied. How dare the G.O.P. invite such Karl-rove-approved RINOS as Rudolph Giuliani, John McCain and Arnold Schwarzenegger to water down their party’s message! Half the Republicans in Congress signed a letter of protest demanding that everyone’s favorite adulterer/gun-grabber, Henry Hyde, be allowed to speak the convention in a prime time slot. Kate O’Beirne of NRO went even further, attacking the very fact that these faux Republicans were allowed to speak at all. Quoth Ms. O’Beirne:

The decision to showcase rogue elephants as representatives of the modern Republican party is not the mark of a self-confident party establishment. If the lineup is intended to make an overwhelmingly conservative party attractive to swing voters, it does so by pretending to be something it’s not.

Michelle Malkin agreed wholeheartedly, citing the above passage with approval in a blog entry titled “CONSERVATIVES NOT WELCOME.” Spoons swiftly replied, citing the “purging of any vestige of conservatism from the Republican Party” as a reason for his refusal to support George Bush this fall. Countless others agreed. At the time, I was virtually alone in arguing that the decision to invite the nation’s most popular Republicans, rather than the most doctrinally conservative ones, was the right thing to do. My argument was essentially twofold. On the one hand, I argued that the real purpose of the conventions should be to win the election this November, not to get into a pissing contest over who can be more conservative than who else. On the other, I opined that for all of the ideological differences between these “rogue elephants” and the “real” Republicans, the “rogues” were unlikely to deliver messages inconsistent with the basic views of the party.

Partial vindication came shortly after the Democrat convention, which produced no bounce for Kerry, or worse. Further vindication followed when my brother, one of the typical left-leaning Bush-despising independents the Democrat convention was supposed to reach – informed me and my moonbat aunt that he thought the Democrats – whom no one accused of inviting too many DINOs – had thoroughly stunk up the joint. But true vindication came yesterday and today, when John McCain, Rudolph Guiliani and Arnold Schwarzenegger – three of the alleged RINOs all the hard rightists had been so hot and bothered about – delivered three of the finest speeches I have heard on my life, without watering down the Republican message one iota.

Maybe Bloomberg and Pataki will blow it. I don’t even care. Those two were mandatory “courtesy” invites anyway. You simply can’t hold a party convention in any city with a mayor and a governor who are members of your party and not invite both of them to speak. I don’t expect them to advertise their RINOhood any more than McCain, Guiliani and Schwarzenegger did, but I don’t expect to be wowed by them, either. That’s OK.

Final thoughts for the day:

• Only Nixon could go to China.
• Only McCain could attack Michael Moore.
• Only Schwarzenegger could rehabilitate Nixon.

P.S. Am I the only one who, couldn’t listen to Arnold’s “you are a Republican” litany without being reminded of Xrlq Foxworthy’s legendary “You Might Be a Redneck” routine?

For me, Guiliani’s speech was the highlight, though McCain’s wasn’t half bad, either. Money quote:

But it’s important, and critical, to see the contrast in approach between these two men. President Bush, a leader who’s willing to stick with difficult decisions even if public opinion shifts, and goes back and forth and John Kerry, whose record in elected office suggests a man who changes his position even on important issues. Now, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, John Kerry voted against the Persian Gulf War.

[Massive booing ensues.]

Ahh, but he must have heard your booing.

[Booing immediately changes to cheering.]

Because later, he said he actually supported the war. Then, in 2002, as he was calculating his run for the Presidency, he voted for the war in Iraq. And then just nine months later, he voted against an $87 billion supplemental budget to fund the war and support our troops. He even at one point declared that [sic] himself as an anti-war as an anti-war candidate. And now he says he’s a pro-war candidate. At this rate, with 64 days left, he still has time to change his position four or five more times.

That was my favorite part. What was yours? Or your least favorite?