Freecer Split: Have we ever been this divided?

[PrezLeefun]

I have noticed over the past few weeks we have been increasingly divided, extra touchy, and even mean with people we are usually friendly and in agreement with.

What the Hell is going on? Have we ever been this split up over the issues and candidates before? So much so we have become this testy?:confused:

[UnkHiram]

Election Year, and no real conservative still in the running. Everyone (including me) is PMSing

[TeenageRepublican]

I think it's because we have sucky choices for candidates. And because one Republican turned out to be anti-Iraq War and that really divided us.

It's Bush's fault.

[Teenager]

It's always like this during the election cycle. People have passions, and really want their candidate to win. I'm still upset that McCain is winning. :(

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:unsmile: A lot of folks here are disappointed that there is no perfect conservative running. We need to get over it, & vote for the best person available. In the meantime, I'm afraid that folks will be at each others's throats.

[Elgalad]

The DBM won a major battle in their War On Conservatism, and we haven't had enough time to regroup yet.

Wake me up in 2012.


-Elgalad

[jayson]

And because one Republican turned out to be anti-Iraq War and that really divided us.

That's a joke, right?

[PrezLeefun]

I dont think it is a joke.........

[TeenageRepublican]

No, it's not. Ron Paul's anti-Iraq War beliefs did divide us when the Paul supporters came on here and then we all got a little bit more pissy at each other. Plus, there were some Rudy supporters and others. It's just something I've noticed.

[Teenager]

Politics, especially at election time, is like football. Only, instead of two teams playing each other, there are about 5 teams buttin' heads against each other(for the primaries, anyways).

Once it's all over, we'll all become good friends again...

[ColonialMarine0431]

The GOP is much bigger than one lame nominee.

All politics is local. Whoever is in the WH come November, we can always focus on our local and state representatives and senators.

[Incident_command]

All politics is local. Whoever is in the WH come November, we can always focus on our local and state representatives and senators.


You and I have that jackass Mel Martinez to deal with in our state.

[ColonialMarine0431]

You and I have that jackass Mel Martinez to deal with in our state.

When Shamnesty was being pushed, I emailed him about 100 times via NUMBERSUSA. Well, he put me on his emailing list. :confused: I still get them about once a week. They make for amusing reading, and I print them out to keep in the bathroom in case I run outta toilet paper.

SEE! I being Green! I'm recycling!

[Lubbock]

. . . . vote for the best person available. . . .

Except when it appeared that the best we were going to get was Rudy.

It was a different story from a sizeable number of Freecers then.

As I remember, Rudy had one stance that didn't sit well with some Freecers, and those individuals declared they would sit it out, even if it put Hillary in the White House.

I've got more than one problem with McCain, and it didn't start yesterday. I've despised the man for more years than I can remember. My utter hatred for McCain didn't start with his defeat for the nomination in 2000 and his back stabbing behavior since.

I have despised him for years. I don't like his looks. I don't like his voice. I don't like his politics. I don't like his butt kissing Democrats --and that didn't start after his defeat in 2000.

He's a mean, nasty, ill tempered, back stabbing, media whore of a little man.

Lest no one understand how much I hate the man, let me be clear: I wouldn't vote for him if he was running against Osama bin Laden.

At one time, I thought I might be able to cast a vote for him if it looked like Texas would tilt Democrat. I've had second thoughts about that. If Texas goes Dem, then it will just have to go, and McCain won't get my vote.

[ThomasMore]

Split among the Freecers?

Naw. I like everybody...

...except people who said they voted for Huckabee. Now THEY are bad news!

.

.

(Kidding...just kidding!) :D

[TeenageRepublican]

McCain is an Evolutionist and is for open borders. I'm just curious, why else do you people despise him?

[Incident_command]

When Shamnesty was being pushed, I emailed him about 100 times via NUMBERSUSA. Well, he put me on his emailing list. :confused: I still get them about once a week. They make for amusing reading, and I print them out to keep in the bathroom in case I run outta toilet paper.

SEE! I being Green! I'm recycling!

I emailed him a photocopy of a contribution I sent him for his last election along with a note saying he would never get another dime from me.
And as a result of that............I also was put on his email list.

[Taylor1]

No, it's not. Ron Paul's anti-Iraq War beliefs did divide us when the Paul supporters came on here and then we all got a little bit more pissy at each other. Plus, there were some Rudy supporters and others. It's just something I've noticed.

I don't know of any Rudy supporters being anti-war (I was a rudy supporter) until he dropped out.

[DoctorDoom]

McCain is an Evolutionist and is for open borders. I'm just curious, why else do you people despise him?McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, the Gang of 14, opposition to tax cuts, support for amnesty, etcetera etcetera etcetera.

The post-debate analysis is rumbling through the blogosphere and MSM, and most are missing the key exchaneg from last night. It reminds me of how the MSM overlooked John Kerry's "global test" in the first debate with the president, but the "global test" language proved to be a huge problem for Kerry despite the style points he won from many observors in debate one from the fall of 2004.

There was a similar moment last night when Senator McCain responded to Governor Romney's blast at McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy.

John McCain bristled and struck out at Mitt Romney last night when the former governor of Massachusetts blasted McCain for his sponsorship of the campaign finance "refrom" act that bears his name. There's a message in McCain's reaction --the Arizona senator knows that the GOP has been deeply wounded by the law that unleashed George Soros, but at an even deeper level, Senator McCain realizes that his indifference to constitutional principles embodied in that law is one of the three schisms he cannot repair or paper over or bridge, each one of which divides him from party faithful. Thus his barely concealed anger and his quick rush to go on the offensive by attacking Romney.McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, The Gang of 14, and The GOP Primary Electorate (http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/53865d5d-be76-43c9-9e93-70418d848468)

And his obsession with cooperating with if not kissing up to the RATs is his most egregious failing. Show me one RAT who wants to "reach out" to the Republicans.

bipartisanship (n): Republicans licking the boots of Democrats

[Incident_command]

McCain is an Evolutionist and is for open borders. I'm just curious, why else do you people despise him?

McCain Feingold.

McCain Kennedy

Article 3 trials for gitmo pow's

Voted against tax cuts

[Timberwolf]

The GOP is much bigger than one lame nominee.
Hopefully...

All politics is local.
Which is why I'm likely gonna be running against the tax'n'spend liberal in my ward here in town this coming June.

Whoever is in the WH come November, we can always focus on our local and state representatives and senators.
I'm actually hoping for a brokered convention, during which Newt will be "drafted".

Yeah, and tomorrow monkeys will crawl out of Hillary's rear...

[TeenageRepublican]

Thanks for explaining.

[maxparrish]

:unsmile: A lot of folks here are disappointed that there is no perfect conservative running. We need to get over it, & vote for the best person available. In the meantime, I'm afraid that folks will be at each others's throats.

On the slight chance that anyone missed it, 'No perfect conservative' is a coded term for John McCain supporters. They are merely 'imperfect conservatives' that are hostile to tax cuts, drug companies, free speech, the detention of illegal combatants, justices who are are called conservative, and American borders.

These 'imperfect conservatives' actively oppose ending judicial filibusters that help 'perfect conservatives'; they promote amnesty (plus) for illegal aliens, and they usually confess they "don't know anything about the economy".

Finally, 'imperfect conservatives' say they oppose abortion but vote for stem cell research and oppose the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Oddly, among the leading Republicans, there is actually only ONE totally 'imperfect conservative', while among leading Democrats there are many 'imperfect conservatives'. However, this confusion might be avoided if we note that 'imperfect conservatives' are more commonly known as "liberals".

So yes, we are unhappy because we are likely to nominate an 'imperfect conservative', a liberal named John McCain.

[maxparrish]

McCain is an Evolutionist and is for open borders. I'm just curious, why else do you people despise him? I don't think anyone despises him because he happens to think evolution is valid biological theory - last I checked no one is proposing massive changes to our life style based on those life science beliefs.

LOTS of us despise him for numerous personal and political faults. He is a rotten leader, back stabber, ego driven and self righteous, thoughtless, economically ignorant, emotionally unstable, and likely to make irrational choices based on impulse and emotion.

Coulter provides a long list at her website - which is why we hate him. So far I have yet to even run into a McCain supporter - no doubt because most of them are intellectually unprepared to defend him.

[Beowulf]

:unsmile: A lot of folks here are disappointed that there is no perfect conservative running. We need to get over it, & vote for the best person available.

Ummm....No! Well, maybe. Unfortunately, the best person available isn't a McPain, Obama or Hitlery. For me, it will be a Constitutionalist. I'm not settling or compromising my values just to vote against Hitlery. Oh, I'll vote against her, just not the way everyone else here wants me to.

[buckeyepete]

Why are we so split? -- It's what makes America so great. It's called freedom of choice. We don't have to follow the Pied Piper. We have the right to agree, disagree, or agree to disagree. We can present our side of an argument, as well as 'listen to opposing views. We can be closed minded and refuse to learn, or listen and learn.

I, for one, have read a lot about the candidates, both Dem's and Pub's, that I wasn't fully aware of in the beginning.

I saw an unwavering support of FDT finally corrode into a search for the 'next best choice.'

Rudy's supporters were initially chastised for their support, as well as the Paul supporter's. ( still are ). And, now, we are fearing McCain.

On the RAT side, we fear "it's our turn N.O.W." or the "Magic Negro."

Yes, we are 'split', but I wouldn't have it any other way. I , for one, don't relish the idea of following the gerbils off the cliff. I don't follow, blindly, behind a political Pied Piper.

Just my thoughts. It's been a fun and informative ride.

Pete

[RogerFGay]

So here's how I mention the divide and conquer thing to Europeans:

American Political Primer for Europeans (http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/03/american-political-primer-for-europeans/)

[Rhino]

Yeah, and tomorrow monkeys will crawl out of Hillary's rear...:lol:

[Air Force Guy]

You and I have that jackass Mel Martinez to deal with in our state.Well, if lukewarm Mel gets his way...he'll be kissy kissy with McPain in Washington as an appointee to a cush job.

[PrezLeefun]

So McCain definately has the nom now?



That's depressing.

[garlicguy]

bipartisanship (n): Republicans licking the boots of Democrats

I had no idea you spoke the King's English! Boots! Quaintly compliant!

[Incident_command]

Well, if lukewarm Mel gets his way...he'll be kissy kissy with McPain in Washington as an appointee to a cush job.

And rumor has it he will pick a homo, "allegedly" as his running mate. Gov. Sorry Charlie Crist.

[MrSanity]

McCain is an Evolutionist and is for open borders. I'm just curious, why else do you people despise him?The vast majority of Republican candidates were evolutionists, and I don't see why that even matters.

So long as they don't jack up the educational system with heavier intervention by the federal government in order to shove Darwin's feces down our throats.

[MrSanity]

I have noticed over the past few weeks we have been increasingly divided, extra touchy, and even mean with people we are usually friendly and in agreement with.

What the Hell is going on? Have we ever been this split up over the issues and candidates before? So much so we have become this testy?:confused:We were divided because we were miserable.

Thompson united many of us, even though he didn't have credentials as an executive. But once he dropped out, it went downhill from there. There was no clear conservative.

And some wonder why abstract makes liberals so pissy and miserable... :thumb:

But anyhow, the second choice is always a hard one.

We didn't prefer any of the three - McCain/Huckabee/Romney - but we had to pick one.

McCain has the most credentials on military issues, even though I find him too hawkish, personally.

Huckabee, although he did not support school choice as governor, was still the most viable candidate on social issues.

Romney was easily the most fiscally conservative out of the three, but he has a lot of explaining to do for many people on why he went from Lincoln Chafee (total RINO) to Rick Santorum (conservative) in a few years' time.

We went wherever our passions took us.

[Air Force Guy]

And rumor has it he will pick a homo, "allegedly" as his running mate. Gov. Sorry Charlie Christ.Hold on. Just a cotton pickin' minute!

I'd heard a rumor that Crist was queer. Izzat really true? Good riddance to bad rubbish if Charlie ducks out of governorship to run as Veep in the Fall. Get us a REAL conservative leader in Tallahassee.

I guess Charlie was sucking up to McCain last week in more ways than one?

[gnome]

And rumor has it he will pick a homo, "allegedly" as his running mate. Gov. Sorry Charlie Christ.

I wasn't aware of that scandal. Think I've been paying too much attention to national news. What's up?

[Chris]

So here's how I mention the divide and conquer thing to Europeans:

American Political Primer for Europeans (http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/03/american-political-primer-for-europeans/)

Good explanation Roger. There's lots of Americans that are as clueless about that stuff as the Europeans are, too.

[Incident_command]

Allegedly. After meeting him twice I would say its a safe bet that Crist is gay.
What isn't up in the air is that he is alot of talk and little results.
His tax cuts are a joke.
He promised insurance rates will come down, thats something he has little to no ability to do.
He is against offshore drilling and buys into global warming.
Last, he has no intention of addressing the huge illegal immigration problem we have.

Sorry for the typo, its Crist not Christ

[DesertFox]

Have we ever been this divided? You weren't here in the early days. We had REAL wars then.

Have we ever been this divided? In the winter of '65. We were hungry, just barely alive.

[The_Sonarman]

Sorry folks. I for one am not going to "get over it".

I am not, repeat not, going to vote "for" anyone who has directly assaulted Freedom of Speech (McCain-Feingold), and who voted "for" illegal alien amnesty (McCain-Kennedy). McCain not only voted "for" those measures, he co-sponsored the Bills. He became my political enemy long ago. Anyone who will directly violate the Bill of Rights will do it again, and will do anything he/she damn well pleases as a true Tyrant. What is the next target within the Bill of Rights? The Second Amendment?

I see little difference between Senator McCain, Senator Clinton, or Senator Obama as President. McCain isn't just a "slightly tainted" Republican. He is my political opponent, and hostile to my vision of America. I will not support an enemy, just because he might be "less bad" than the DNC choice. "Holding my Nose" and voting McCain is unacceptable.

Perhaps things will change between now and Election Day. Frankly, I strongly doubt it. The DNC and RNC are increasingly looking like a one party system, with no discernable differences.

Feel free to dump on me for "wasting my vote". It's happened many times before.

[The_Elucidator]

I have noticed over the past few weeks we have been increasingly divided, extra touchy, and even mean with people we are usually friendly and in agreement with.

What the Hell is going on? Have we ever been this split up over the issues and candidates before? So much so we have become this testy?:confused:

Never fear my dear Prez, all of this is normal. I read this as a passionate group of people who care very deeply about this great country!

Regardless of our level of passion for the remaining candidates, the equally important issue that is oft times over looked, is the House and Senate at the State and Federal level. They will all need our support this fall, and we can't allow a less than palatable POTUS candidate get us down. Many of us have a real dogfight in our congressional districts that need our attention.

[BarkleUSA]

ok, so we're divided, extra touchy...

Now that it's down to McCain and Hackabee we're trying to come to terms with the fact that no conservative will be on the ticket.

Voting for McCain instead of Hillary or Obama feels too much like taking the wife to the opera instead of a Tupperware party on Supebowl Sunday - either way you lose and don't get what you want.

...think I'll sit this one out.

[The_Elucidator]

...think I'll sit this one out.

You are talking about the POTUS right; not the overall election?

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Sorry folks. I for one am not going to "get over it".

I am not, repeat not, going to vote "for" anyone who has directly assaulted Freedom of Speech (McCain-Feingold), and who voted "for" illegal alien amnesty (McCain-Kennedy).

Ditto.

Feel free to dump on me for "wasting my vote". It's happened many times before.

You won't get that from me Sonar, because I will be standing right beside you on the other side of the line in the sand.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Lubbock:
Except when it appeared that the best we were going to get was Rudy.

It was a different story from a sizeable number of Freecers then.

As I remember, Rudy had one stance that didn't sit well with some Freecers, and those individuals declared they would sit it out, even if it put Hillary in the White House.

:sulk: You got that right. Although, I seem to recall getting criticized for being a one-issue voter. At least my one issue only prompted me to reject one Republican candidate. It seems to me that we have a lot of multi-issue voters here who want to reject all of the remaining three Republicans because they don't line up with all of their multiple pet issues.

[PrezLeefun]

and the testiness never ends.......... lol

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

My "multiple pet issues" can be summed up in one word - Conservatism. Yes, I do reject the remaining "R"epublicans because they have abandoned me and the conservative core of the party. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with some, but at least I can sleep at night and look at myself in the mirror in the morning. I compromise my principles for no one, and I won't be guilted into it.

[Timberwolf]

Sorry folks. I for one am not going to "get over it".

I am not, repeat not, going to vote "for" anyone who has directly assaulted Freedom of Speech (McCain-Feingold), and who voted "for" illegal alien amnesty (McCain-Kennedy). McCain not only voted "for" those measures, he co-sponsored the Bills. He became my political enemy long ago. Anyone who will directly violate the Bill of Rights will do it again, and will do anything he/she damn well pleases as a true Tyrant. What is the next target within the Bill of Rights? The Second Amendment?

I see little difference between Senator McCain, Senator Clinton, or Senator Obama as President. McCain isn't just a "slightly tainted" Republican. He is my political opponent, and hostile to my vision of America. I will not support an enemy, just because he might be "less bad" than the DNC choice. "Holding my Nose" and voting McCain is unacceptable.

Perhaps things will change between now and Election Day. Frankly, I strongly doubt it. The DNC and RNC are increasingly looking like a one party system, with no discernable differences.

Feel free to dump on me for "wasting my vote". It's happened many times before.
:claps::claps::claps::claps::claps::claps::claps:

Absofrigginlutely!!

[Longhorn_Platinum]

HomeschoolrsRUs:
My "multiple pet issues" can be summed up in one word - Conservatism. Yes, I do reject the remaining "R"epublicans because they have abandoned me and the conservative core of the party. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with some, but at least I can sleep at night and look at myself in the mirror in the morning. I compromise my principles for no one, and I won't be guilted into it.

:unsmile: I'll probably take it on the chin for saying this, but if McCain gets the nomination, I'll vote for him on the slim hope that his Supreme Court appointments will be pro-life. He may very well disappoint me on this, but who knows? Maybe he'll appoint a pro-lifer unwittingly, if not intentionally. Anyway, that's the principle I'm fighting for, & I'll stick to it to the bitter end, and I'll be able to live with myself for having done all that I could to rescue the unborn.

[Suzie]

:unsmile: I'll probably take it on the chin for saying this, but if McCain gets the nomination, I'll vote for him on the slim hope that his Supreme Court appointments will be pro-life. He may very well disappoint me on this, but who knows? Maybe he'll appoint a pro-lifer unwittingly, if not intentionally. Anyway, that's the principle I'm fighting for, & I'll stick to it to the bitter end, and I'll be able to live with myself for having done all that I could to rescue the unborn.
I am with you, but my main reason is for the troops. Hillary and Obama would destroy all the sacrifice military families have made, and the military as a whole. So there are more reason than we think maybe.

[TeenageRepublican]

The vast majority of Republican candidates were evolutionists, and I don't see why that even matters.

So long as they don't jack up the educational system with heavier intervention by the federal government in order to shove Darwin's feces down our throats.

Neither do I. But it somehow is an issue. Mitt was challenged for his Mormon faith but the Evolutionists weren't asked all these questions. That's what pisses me off.

And I apologize if this thread ends up getting hijacked.

[Rhino]

You're not the only one, Sonar. Not even close.

[Beowulf]

Sorry folks. I for one am not going to "get over it".

I am not, repeat not, going to vote "for" anyone who has directly assaulted Freedom of Speech (McCain-Feingold), and who voted "for" illegal alien amnesty (McCain-Kennedy). McCain not only voted "for" those measures, he co-sponsored the Bills. He became my political enemy long ago. Anyone who will directly violate the Bill of Rights will do it again, and will do anything he/she damn well pleases as a true Tyrant. What is the next target within the Bill of Rights? The Second Amendment?

I see little difference between Senator McCain, Senator Clinton, or Senator Obama as President. McCain isn't just a "slightly tainted" Republican. He is my political opponent, and hostile to my vision of America. I will not support an enemy, just because he might be "less bad" than the DNC choice. "Holding my Nose" and voting McCain is unacceptable.

Perhaps things will change between now and Election Day. Frankly, I strongly doubt it. The DNC and RNC are increasingly looking like a one party system, with no discernable differences.

Feel free to dump on me for "wasting my vote". It's happened many times before.

As Rhino said, you're not alone, Bro! I too will "waste my vote" in November as I hold onto what I hold dearest and those are my principles and morals.

[DoctorDoom]

I had no idea you spoke the King's English! Boots! Quaintly compliant!The fact that you, in your state of semi-literacy, see fit to mock my choice of words in no way detracts from my unarguable mastery of the English language.

Go now and lament the political passing of Saint RuPaul.

[DoctorDoom]

I'll probably take it on the chin for saying this, but if McCain gets the nomination, I'll vote for him on the slim hope that his Supreme Court appointments will be pro-life. He may very well disappoint me on this, but who knows? That possibility is infinitely preferable to knowing as a certainty that the RAT will appoint one or more ultraliberal "justices" to the SCOTUS who will "religiously" enforce the liberal agenda.

Count on these things with RATs in the Oval office and dominating Congress:

• The SCOTUS will be unstoppably leftist.
• The "Fairness" Doctrine will silence talk radio.
• Private firearms ownership will be abolished and guns will be confiscated.
• Further censorship of Christianity will ensue.
• Perversion will be legitimized.
• We will be told in minute detail what to wear, what to eat, what to drive, and how to live.
• We will have a socialist "healthcare" system ala England, Canada and Cuba.
• We will see a mass exodus of business to other countries as the feds make it all but impossible to make a profit here.
• Energy will become woefully inadequate and will be rationed.
• And we'll by crushed under an Everest-sized mountain of new taxes.

THAT will show the GOP, by gosh golly!

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:unsmile: I agree with DoctorDoom & Suzie. In spite of the reasons that MaxParrish gave to vote against McCain, there are still plenty of reasons to vote for him. Either McCain or the demonic rat will take us to Hell on a handcar, but McCain won't pump it as fast.

[UnkHiram]

It's been a long time since I have said this. I agree with Longhorn. Personally, I detest McCain and his anti-Freedom stands on many issues. However, its like choosing between being starved to death or shot. Shooting is faster, but you might just figure out a way out of starving.

[garlicguy]

:question:The fact that you, in your state of semi-literacy, see fit to mock my choice of words in no way detracts from my unarguable mastery of the English language.

Go now and lament the political passing of Saint RuPaul.

Wasn't mocking. Joking. "Boot" = trunk (of auto) = rear.

Prez is right.

Touchy, touchy, touchy.

I have not come here to antagonize, but to participate as the home page indicates, in all things conservative.

Lighten up, eh? Sheesh! :D

[garlicguy]

Sorry folks. I for one am not going to "get over it".

I am not, repeat not, going to vote "for" anyone who has directly assaulted Freedom of Speech (McCain-Feingold), and who voted "for" illegal alien amnesty (McCain-Kennedy). McCain not only voted "for" those measures, he co-sponsored the Bills. He became my political enemy long ago. Anyone who will directly violate the Bill of Rights will do it again, and will do anything he/she damn well pleases as a true Tyrant. What is the next target within the Bill of Rights? The Second Amendment?

I see little difference between Senator McCain, Senator Clinton, or Senator Obama as President. McCain isn't just a "slightly tainted" Republican. He is my political opponent, and hostile to my vision of America. I will not support an enemy, just because he might be "less bad" than the DNC choice. "Holding my Nose" and voting McCain is unacceptable.

Perhaps things will change between now and Election Day. Frankly, I strongly doubt it. The DNC and RNC are increasingly looking like a one party system, with no discernable differences.

Feel free to dump on me for "wasting my vote". It's happened many times before.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend! If all voters voted their true conscience, instead of for who they think would win, we would never have gotten into this pickle. Voting for the lesser of evils still would leave one supporting evil.

Glad you're voting your conscience, Sonarman. You'll never need to second guess yourself that way. :claps:

[Bluemoon_Rising]

That possibility is infinitely preferable to knowing as a certainty that the RAT will appoint one or more ultraliberal "justices" to the SCOTUS who will "religiously" enforce the liberal agenda.

Count on these things with RATs in the Oval office and dominating Congress:

• The SCOTUS will be unstoppably leftist.
• The "Fairness" Doctrine will silence talk radio.
• Private firearms ownership will be abolished and guns will be confiscated.
• Further censorship of Christianity will ensue.
• Perversion will be legitimized.
• We will be told in minute detail what to wear, what to eat, what to drive, and how to live.
• We will have a socialist "healthcare" system ala England, Canada and Cuba.
• We will see a mass exodus of business to other countries as the feds make it all but impossible to make a profit here.
• Energy will become woefully inadequate and will be rationed.
• And we'll by crushed under an Everest-sized mountain of new taxes.

THAT will show the GOP, by gosh golly!

It is imperative that we support McCain against the alternative, and then -- should he be elected as I hope -- hold him to the conservative line as much as we possibly can. It's not perfect, but the alternative is madness.

[Naturalized-Texan]

I know that I had always said that any Republican would be better than Hillary or Obama. I wavered from that position for a day or two after Romney dropped out and it became evident that McCain would be the nominee. However, after considering a couple of major issues - the War on Terror and all that it encompasses and the possibility of getting some conservative SC Justices - I am moving back to my original position. I will most likely hold my nose and vote for McCain in the general election.

However, I will not vote for McCain in the Texas Presidential Primary election. If either Romney or Fred Thompson is still on the ballot, I'll vote for one of them.

[Naturalized-Texan]

It is imperative that we support McCain against the alternative, and then -- should he be elected as I hope -- hold him to the conservative line as much as we possibly can. It's not perfect, but the alternative is madness.
We conservatives must do everything possible to ensure that enough Republicans are elected to both houses of Congress to thwart any and all leftist legislation that would be proposed by whoever is elected president in November, Republican or Democrat.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

Agree . . . that too.

[Lubbock]

Here I go again.

Would someone please pas the salt, because I'm back to having to eat my words.

NT and Moon have the right answer.

But Lord Have Mercy, I do despise John McCain.

[Naturalized-Texan]

But Lord Have Mercy, I do despise John McCain.
So do I. But I despise Hillary and Obama more - Obama for his liberal fascism and Hillary as a person as well as for her liberal fascism.

[Timberwolf]

That possibility is infinitely preferable to knowing as a certainty that the RAT will appoint one or more ultraliberal "justices" to the SCOTUS who will "religiously" enforce the liberal agenda.

Count on these things with RATs in the Oval office and dominating Congress:

• The SCOTUS will be unstoppably leftist.
• The "Fairness" Doctrine will silence talk radio.
• Private firearms ownership will be abolished and guns will be confiscated.
• Further censorship of Christianity will ensue.
• Perversion will be legitimized.
• We will be told in minute detail what to wear, what to eat, what to drive, and how to live.
• We will have a socialist "healthcare" system ala England, Canada and Cuba.
• We will see a mass exodus of business to other countries as the feds make it all but impossible to make a profit here.
• Energy will become woefully inadequate and will be rationed.
• And we'll by crushed under an Everest-sized mountain of new taxes.

THAT will show the GOP, by gosh golly!
...and it will be different under a McCain administration in what way? I just don't get it...why should I vote for a liberal just because he has an "R" behind his name?

[Timberwolf]

Just for the record...Abe Lincoln was a THIRD party candidate, was he not? Yeah, the Republicans usurped the power of the Whigs, right?

[UnkHiram]

Timber

Abe was elected in 1860 -- that was 148 years ago. Do you honestly believe that the political process is the same?

[ThomasMore]

I am not there yet.

I understand the point that McCain, as self-dealing, backstabbing, liberal and turncoat as he is, is less bad than either Clinton or Obama.

But he is far too far away from anything I can support with my vote.

Here is a man who has p!$$ed on the current administration, who has turned on conservatives and on his fellow Republicans, repeatedly, and sucked up to the Democrats and the press. Think about it: McCain considered running against the Republican Party as Jon Carry's running mate in 2004. The only difference between McCain and Jim Jeffords is that Jeffords actually showed more honesty and intestinal fortitude and went through with it.

Mad McCain is utterly unreliable and self-interested. He has demonstrated a rock-solid immunity to any phiilosophical principle, and he has stuck his fingers in conservatives' eyes until they have run out of eyes. As a self-proclaimed Reagan Conservative, he must have been sleeping when Reagan uttered his famous Eleventh Commandment. Or more likely, he liked his own version better: "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Democrat."

In any event, McCain is utterly unelectable, for two reasons, which will come together to smash his candidacy in the general election.

1. The DBM HATES conservatives and Republicans. It has fawned on McCain precisely because he turns on his own party so reliably. Now that it will have to decide between a Real Democrat and a Republican, any Republican, it will drop him like a hot potato. My guess is that he will be genuinely surprised by this: he has had a lip-lock on their posteriors for so long that he can't imagine that they will walk away from him.

2. Movement conservatives have long memories and have had many years to take an accounting of John McCain. Very few will campaign for him. Some will grudgingly pull a lever for him; some won't even show him that courtesy. For someone who has so often violated the Eleventh Commandment and turned on his fellow Republicans, I am sure he will understand when some of us return the favor to him in spades.

John McCain will still have his Senate seat, but he will know that he finally had "his turn." He will begin his slide into angry obscurity on November 5, 2008.

As for the general election, I will put my vote into those races where my vote might make a difference -- local and congressional races. The White House will be a choice between disaster and unacceptable unelectable. Neither party earns my vote.

[CharlieChan]

Yes-many time-War between the States is a good example(Civil War)

[Beowulf]

Here is a man who has p!$$ed on the current administration, who has turned on conservatives and on his fellow Republicans, repeatedly, and sucked up to the Democrats and the press. Think about it: McCain considered running against the Republican Party as Jon Carry's running mate in 2004.
I think people forget these facts too easily, especially the last part where he almost ran as a Democrat with John Kerry. I already could not vote for him for his pro-amnesty stance and McCain-Feingold legislation but this makes me feel better in deciding to vote Constitutionalist in November. I think anyone who overlooks these facts and still votes for him to "consider the alternative" is as much a Liberal as McCain himself.

As for the general election, I will put my vote into those races where my vote might make a difference -- local and congressional races. The White House will be a choice between disaster and unacceptable unelectable.
As will I.

I also believe the GOP has abandoned Conservatives. Instead of bitching about not having a viable 3rd party, lets band together and make one that is!!

[ThomasMore]

McCain is an Evolutionist and is for open borders. I'm just curious, why else do you people despise him?

Annie Coulter (http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/b9769a28-f1fa-4ee9-af17-c9955af1a2e5) has a nice video about McCain.

[ThomasMore]

See this thread. (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=55838)

[TheIrishman]

McCain flopped on the Border. Now he is all for closing it down. He has NO other plans about forcing the illegals already here to leave, though. In fact, he is still for amnesty. Thompson was the best candidate. He had to drop. Between Mcain and Romney, Romney was the best candidate, he had to drop. Ron paul is the best candidate now but he is SOOO far behind. Nothing looks good.
Of course the Democrats strike out on all of the three major issues. Iraq, Immigration and the Economy. So where do you look now??

[DoctorDoom]

My predictions:

On November 4th, the POTUS will be a RAT. The libeRATs have no qualms about voting en masse for whichever of the two is the candidate. There WILL be a RAT in the Oval Office on Inauguration Day. And our children and theirs will curse and condemn us for creating the Amerikkan Socialist Republic in which they will live in fear, without freedom, without courage and without hope.

One thing is certain: there will never again be a conservative president, and most likely never again a Republican president ... if indeed there is ever again another elected president.

The only positive thought is that the media will be taken over and will become state agencies, which is SOP for dictatorships. With that, the traitors will discover how grateful tyrannies are.

<hr>
"I’ve spoken of the shining city [upon a hill] all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That’s how I saw it and see it still. And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that; after 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she’s still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home."
-- Ronald Reagan, Farewell Address From the Oval Office, January 11, 1989

The light is aboiut to be extinguished. And then nothing will matter any more.

[DesertFox]

If all voters voted their true conscience, instead of for who they think would win, we would never have gotten into this pickle. On the contrary, we'd have arrived here much sooner.

Voting for the lesser of evils still would leave one supporting evil. All humans are sinners, meaning we have evil in us. So voting for ANYBODY AT ALL would still leave one supporting evil.

In heaven, you can have everything as it should be. On earth, you can't. You will ALWAYS be selecting, in one way or another, the lesser evil, in politics or the grocery store or the gas pump.

[DesertFox]

The final thing to say about all this is that whoever gets voted in will still have to hoodwink America before he/she/it can commit us all to their idiotic policies. It remains for us to fight back and not let them. We hear about the huge defeat Bush suffered in the 06 elections, but it was just barely a defeat at all. Don't let the DBM distort your vision of what happened then or what could or will happen if you aren't in there swinging every day, calling things by their right names, standing up for YOUR (our?) vision.

[Naturalized-Texan]

...and it will be different under a McCain administration in what way? I just don't get it...why should I vote for a liberal just because he has an "R" behind his name?
Because McCain would continue to fight the War on Terror - the Dems won't; because he would nominate conservative judges and Justices - the Dems won't.

[Lubbock]

. . . He has NO other plans about forcing the illegals already here to leave . . .

We've gnawed this illegal "bone" down to he marrow.

Actually, I think the best solution for forcing the illegals back across the border is going to come from the states, and from local governments. We're seeing it take hold already.

Is anyone aware of what Oklahoma has done? Arizona? Numerous local governments regardng renting to illegals, and employment of illegals?

Ultimately, more Federal Legislation isn't going to make a dimes worth of difference. In 35+ years, it's only made it worse.

States and local governments are going to have either have to toughen up, or get a mirror so they can sit and watch themselves go broke.

More Federal meddling in the illegal problem is only going to make it worse. Let localalities handle it, pass their own laws, then let the Feds get out of the way and don't interfere with the locals.

We didn't get in this mess the day GWB raised his right hand and took the oath of office. It's not going to end the day he leaves office.

About the only way the Feds can be of service is to cut off all Federal dollars for sanctuary cities, and by taking the handcuffs off of the Border Patrol.

Whomever the president exect is on November 5th, he or she better get it straight on day one: AMERICA As A Whole is fed up with ILLEGALS.

[MrSanity]

...and it will be different under a McCain administration in what way? I just don't get it...why should I vote for a liberal just because he has an "R" behind his name?You honestly think that all this will happen under McCain?:

• The SCOTUS will be unstoppably leftist.
• The "Fairness" Doctrine will silence talk radio.
• Private firearms ownership will be abolished and guns will be confiscated.
• Further censorship of Christianity will ensue.
• Perversion will be legitimized.
• We will be told in minute detail what to wear, what to eat, what to drive, and how to live.
• We will have a socialist "healthcare" system ala England, Canada and Cuba.
• We will see a mass exodus of business to other countries as the feds make it all but impossible to make a profit here.
• Energy will become woefully inadequate and will be rationed.
• And we'll by crushed under an Everest-sized mountain of new taxes.There are only two points that Doom made that are viable under McCain - [1] We will be told in minute detail what to wear, what to eat, what to drive, and how to live and [2] Energy will become woefully inadequate and will be rationed.

But other than that, to suggest that there is no difference between Obamillary and McCain is uninformed and juvenile.

[MrSanity]

If you feel strongly enough about cutting taxes, protecting the Second Amendment, staying on offense in the War on Terror, and appointing pro-life judges, you would plug your nose and vote for McCain.

You can piss and moan all you want about his stance on amnesty, CFR, and global warming, but you won't defeat the leftist plague by staying home.

My vote is going for all those things I first mentioned. Not to mention, Hillary and Obama have no political incentive to close the border. McCain will be forced to hear the right out because they will determine his fate in '12 if he doesn't keep his promise to fix the border before negotiating amnesty.

[jayson]

You can piss and moan all you want about his stance on amnesty, CFR, and global warming, but you won't defeat the leftist plague by staying home.

So you defeat the "leftist plague" by voting for a leftist? I don't get it. :question:

[Lazarus]

I have noticed over the past few weeks we have been increasingly divided, extra touchy, and even mean with people we are usually friendly and in agreement with.

What the Hell is going on? Have we ever been this split up over the issues and candidates before? So much so we have become this testy?:confused:Don't worry Prez... I still wuv yoo...:D

[Rhino]

So you defeat the "leftist plague" by voting for a leftist? I don't get it. :question:I don't either. A differing shade of leftism is still leftism.

[Kathekon]

Call this divided?

1880 Garfield nominated on 36th ballot to break bitter Sherman-Blaine deadlock
1912 TR walks out, forms a 3rd party...
1964 Rockefeller wing deserts Goldwater
1976 Ford weakened by near loss of nomination to Ronald Reagan
1992 Buchanan's bitter challenge weakens Bush Sr.

This is nothing.

[DoctorDoom]

So you defeat the "leftist plague" by voting for a leftist? I don't get it.There is left and there is extreme left. Are you attempting to convince us that McCain is equal to Osama Obama and the Bitch Queen?

On a continuum of -10 for far left to +10 for far right, with Obama and the BQ at -10, where would you put McCain?

[dajoga]

So you defeat the "leftist plague" by voting for a leftist? I don't get it. :question:


...I don't see McC as a leftist, but if he is, at least he's a pro-life one. That's gets my vote.

[The_Elucidator]

There is left and there is extreme left. Are you attempting to convince us that McCain is equal to Osama Obama and the Bitch Queen?

On a continuum of -10 for far left to +10 for far right, with Obama and the BQ at -10, where would you put McCain?

Obama -10
Clinton - 9

McCain - +3
Huck - +4

[The_Sonarman]

I know that I had always said that any Republican would be better than Hillary or Obama. I wavered from that position for a day or two after Romney dropped out and it became evident that McCain would be the nominee. However, after considering a couple of major issues - the War on Terror and all that it encompasses and the possibility of getting some conservative SC Justices - I am moving back to my original position. I will most likely hold my nose and vote for McCain in the general election.

I've had a couple days to be extremely hacked off that I haven't got an optimum candidate to vote for as Potus. I've cooled off a bit. McCain is still my political enemy, given past actions.

I hate to say it, but I might just have no choice but to vote for McCain. I can't believe I'm saying it even now. I'm filthy and soiled even thinking I'm going to be forced to do this. My only saving grace is.... at least he isn't a forgone conclusion and rubber stamp on legislation from a DNC controlled congress.

[maxparrish]

Foolish folks...

We hope (contrary to much of our experience) that McCain is somewhat different than the Hillary/Obama cults. However those baseless hopes not with standing, ONLY McCain has the power to destroy the last redoubt's of conservatism within the Republican party.

As President, McCain has the power to appoint Republican leadership to the Graham's, Lugars, and Warners...which he would do. McCain's Senate record of the last few years shows him to be the 4th or 5th most liberal Republican (only exceeded by Snowe, Collins, and Arlen Spector) in the Senate.

Following the destruction of official conservative power bases within the party, McCain's lunatic opinions will then proceed to de-legitamize all GOP opposition to his holy causes...NO GOP candidate can use CAP & trades, Amnesty, GITMO or other natural conservative issues as issues to contrast themselves with Democrats because a REPUBLICAN President will make them REPUBLICAN causes.

The net result will be MORE congressional losses for Republicans.

IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO ELECT AND GIVE POWER TO A REPULICAN WHOSE AN ENEMY FROM WITHIN!

Let us suffer for four years. Let us regain our identity as a conservative party that CAN offer a contrast to democrats. After the Hillary crowd turns us on our head WE will have an enemy and a cause - WE can elect a future conservative.

Under McCain, we are doomed for a generation.

[Taylor1]

Hmm, what to do, what to do. I don't know what to do.. guys, I'd go with having hillary because we can just have more clinton jokes, and we can achieve this by not voting... opinions and stuff? then there's always, republicansforobama.org...

[Longhorn_Platinum]

maxparrish:
Foolish folks...

Let us suffer for four years.

Under McCain, we are doomed for a generation.

:shame: You're the one who is being foolish. If a demonic rat wins, his/her/its Supreme Court appointments will be the ones to doom us for a generation. What part of that do you not get?

[PrezLeefun]

Don't worry Prez... I still wuv yoo...:D

I wuv u 2!:biggrin:

[Maggie_T]

Except when it appeared that the best we were going to get was Rudy.

It was a different story from a sizeable number of Freecers then.

As I remember, Rudy had one stance that didn't sit well with some Freecers, and those individuals declared they would sit it out, even if it put Hillary in the White House.

I've got more than one problem with McCain, and it didn't start yesterday. I've despised the man for more years than I can remember. My utter hatred for McCain didn't start with his defeat for the nomination in 2000 and his back stabbing behavior since.

I have despised him for years. I don't like his looks. I don't like his voice. I don't like his politics. I don't like his butt kissing Democrats --and that didn't start after his defeat in 2000.

He's a mean, nasty, ill tempered, back stabbing, media whore of a little man.

Lest no one understand how much I hate the man, let me be clear: I wouldn't vote for him if he was running against Osama bin Laden.

At one time, I thought I might be able to cast a vote for him if it looked like Texas would tilt Democrat. I've had second thoughts about that. If Texas goes Dem, then it will just have to go, and McCain won't get my vote.


Lubbock, I LOVE YOU, GIRL! :hugs: Finally, someone who does not fall for the "Oh, but McCain is a hero" schtick. You made it to my personal Hall of Fame, love.

Let ME be clear on something: In my book, McCAIN IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE.

That is why I do not feel guilty about not voting for the bastard. I never voted left in my life. I see no reason to start now, at my ripe old age.

[Maggie_T]

:shame: You're the one who is being foolish. If a demonic rat wins, his/her/its Supreme Court appointments will be the ones to doom us for a generation. What part of that do you not get?


Me? The part where people think that McCain is a conservative, and not the rat (in more than one sense) he is. And therefore, they think that his dictatorship ... beg your pardon, I mean his "presidency" will be different than that of any other rat.

That's what I don't get.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Maggie_T:
Me?

:sulk: No, not you. MaxParrish. He was the one I was quoting. The comments were for him. That's what you don't get.

[Beowulf]

Finally, someone who does not fall for the "Oh, but McCain is a hero" schtick.

I didn't fall for it either, Maggie, and I will NOT support McCain in November!

[TeenageRepublican]

Hmm, what to do, what to do. I don't know what to do.. guys, I'd go with having hillary because we can just have more clinton jokes, and we can achieve this by not voting... opinions and stuff? then there's always, republicansforobama.org...

There's better ways than that, man.

Picture this, we put all the top ten Democrats on an island without any resources except for nature itself. Best reality show ever. That's entertainment. I can already imagine the commercials...

Hillary Clinton: Bill, I'm tired of you running off with interns! Where the hell did you get an intern?

Bill Clinton (holding a coconut with face on it that's drawn by lipstick): Shut up, I don't want you to offend Monica!

Annoncer: Ten Democrats stranded on an island forced to use each other or die.

Michael Moore (gasping for air, sweating like a pig): I can't run much longer!

Nancy Pelosi: You only ran three feet!

Announcer: Watch as they encounter nature's fury itself.

Michael Moore (pointing at hairy object in the woods): What the hell is that?

Al Gore: It's Robin Williams!

Michael Moore: Oh my God!

Annoncer: This fall, prepare for the most mind-numbing expierence ever on Liberal Island.

[Wolfcounsel]

Is anybody listening? Whichever of the two monkeys wins the election, we give it hell, day in and day out, and don't let up until he follows the Constitution. That, plus a good conservative Congress, should be a force to deflate the asshole a lot.

[TeenageRepublican]

Yes, but the question is, how long do we have to wait to get a conservative Congress? And how much damage will be done and is it worth it?

[maxparrish]

:shame: You're the one who is being foolish. If a demonic rat wins, his/her/its Supreme Court appointments will be the ones to doom us for a generation. What part of that do you not get?

This is the ONLY argument made on behalf of McVain that holds some water. If a democrat wins, he/she will nominate a hyper liberal like Ginsburg...and Republican mice will quiver and shake in the Senate, terrified of using the same savage rhetoric that dims use...

If McCain is President he will consult with Harry Reid (like Bush) and Ted Kennedy, he will then tell Republicans he is going to nominate a moderate (liberal) recommended by the same guy (who is one of his campaign chairs) that gave us Souter; one that always votes with the other liberals in a block. So, effectively, two current liberal justices will be replaced by the next President with MORE dutiful liberals.

Yes there is a small chance that that McCain would appoint a jurist that would support free speech over McCains legislation and over-turn Roe V. Wade (which McCain opposes).

But then, there is always a chance that Bill will remain faithful to Hillary for the next four years...

Such is the foolishness of elevating hope over experience.

[maxparrish]

I'm sorry Lubbock, could you be clearer? :)

I'm thinking of starting the "anyone but McCain" campaign, and write up something that would reach more than 100,000 people in the last 60 days before the election. That would violate McCain's law and maybe I could be his FIRST political prisoner?

But you'd guys have to help. A website with a Counter that reachs over 100,000. Then a letter to the the Fair elections board announcing my violation. Of course, I could lose my house and savings by being fined...

Well, that's the kind of man some of you will be voting for.

[MrSanity]

So you defeat the "leftist plague" by voting for a leftist? I don't get it. :question:I have clearly taken the time on several posts to distinguish the major differences between McCain and Obamillary.

Say, if McCain, in addition to his current faults, was "pro-choice" and favored a time-table or immediate troop withdrawl, he would NOT get my vote. Rather, he has shown leadership at least in the War on Terror and would appoint judges who are more inclined to define and support the rule of law more than a political ideology.

McCain is not a conservative, but he's certainly not a "leftist." If McCain doesn't come off as a centrist, I don't know who does in your political dichotomy.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Foolish folks...

We hope (contrary to much of our experience) that McCain is somewhat different than the Hillary/Obama cults. However those baseless hopes not with standing, ONLY McCain has the power to destroy the last redoubt's of conservatism within the Republican party.

As President, McCain has the power to appoint Republican leadership to the Graham's, Lugars, and Warners...which he would do. McCain's Senate record of the last few years shows him to be the 4th or 5th most liberal Republican (only exceeded by Snowe, Collins, and Arlen Spector) in the Senate.

Following the destruction of official conservative power bases within the party, McCain's lunatic opinions will then proceed to de-legitamize all GOP opposition to his holy causes...NO GOP candidate can use CAP & trades, Amnesty, GITMO or other natural conservative issues as issues to contrast themselves with Democrats because a REPUBLICAN President will make them REPUBLICAN causes.

The net result will be MORE congressional losses for Republicans.

IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO ELECT AND GIVE POWER TO A REPULICAN WHOSE AN ENEMY FROM WITHIN!

Let us suffer for four years. Let us regain our identity as a conservative party that CAN offer a contrast to democrats. After the Hillary crowd turns us on our head WE will have an enemy and a cause - WE can elect a future conservative.

Under McCain, we are doomed for a generation.

. . . and . . .

This is the ONLY argument made on behalf of McVain that holds some water. If a democrat wins, he/she will nominate a hyper liberal like Ginsburg...and Republican mice will quiver and shake in the Senate, terrified of using the same savage rhetoric that dims use...

If McCain is President he will consult with Harry Reid (like Bush) and Ted Kennedy, he will then tell Republicans he is going to nominate a moderate (liberal) recommended by the same guy (who is one of his campaign chairs) that gave us Souter; one that always votes with the other liberals in a block. So, effectively, two current liberal justices will be replaced by the next President with MORE dutiful liberals.

Yes there is a small chance that that McCain would appoint a jurist that would support free speech over McCains legislation and over-turn Roe V. Wade (which McCain opposes).

But then, there is always a chance that Bill will remain faithful to Hillary for the next four years...

Such is the foolishness of elevating hope over experience.

. . . my sentiments exactly.

In my opinion, we have as much chance of McCain making Constitutional Constructionist SCOTUS appointments, much less Conservative, than we do of Obama/Hillary (whichever wins) making Constitutional Constructionist SCOTUS appointments by accident.

McCain would WANT, no he would NEED his appointments to make it through as close to unscathed as possible -- meaning, he WILL compromise and deal with the democrats to get his appointment through. He's proved that he WON'T compromise or deal with Conservatives, because he really doesn't care what we want or what we think. McCain wants his legacy to be about his ability to work with the "D"'s and 'get things done.' He isn't about to jeopardize his relationship with the left, because he realizes (although he's pinning his hopes on a sinking ship I hope) the right has no choice and no say in the matter.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:sulk: I'm willing to take the chance. If you think that McCain's Supreme Court appointments will be as bad as a demonic rat's, then you have your head too far up your butt. Go ahead, Homes. Throw out the unborn babies with the bath water, just because McCain isn't EVERYTHING you want in a candidate. And that's exactly what you're doing. Then spare us telling everyone how pro-life you are. Will you be able to look at yourself in your mirror when Empress Wang is appointing justices who will solidify a woman's right to kill her baby? Will you not wish you had at least taken a chance on McCain? It's the only chance we have.

[Suzie]

Reagan nominated liberals for the SCOTUS, there is no guarantee ... unless a democrat is the one picking, then it's a certainty.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

:sulk: I'm willing to take the chance. If you think that McCain's Supreme Court appointments will be as bad as a demonic rat's, then you have your head too far up your butt. Go ahead, Homes. Throw out the unborn babies with the bath water, just because McCain isn't EVERYTHING you want in a candidate. And that's exactly what you're doing. Then spare us telling everyone how pro-life you are. Will you be able to look at yourself in your mirror when Empress Wang is appointing justices who will solidify a woman's right to kill her baby? Will you not wish you had at least taken a chance on McCain? It's the only chance we have.

I didn't attack you personally, I wrote my OPINION. But if you want to make it personal, go ahead, Moo. Throw the unborn babies out with the bath water, that's exactly what YOU are doing. You DO know he supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, he supports using fetal tissue for research, he supposedly wants Roe vs. Wade made irrelevant, yet has stated he would not repeal it. Only RECENTLY, and in a strange case of irony during his decision to run for president, has he modified his stance. YOU are free to trust this liar if you want to. I'm not.

[Lubbock]

. . . You made it to my personal Hall of Fame, love. . . .

Maggie, I may lose my standing, because I know, deep down when push comes to shove, if it looks like Texas will tilt Democrat, I will have to cast a vote for this mean, nasty, vile, ill tempered, hateful, back stabbing son of a buck that we know as John McCain.

Despise him as I do, I'm afraid I will have to vote for him if Texas looks iffy.

As bad as he is, he's still not Hillary or Osamabamabammy.

The key to this thing is getting as many Republicans elected to the House and Senate as possible in order to keep the Dems from running rampant [at least keep them in check] if a Dem takes the White House, or, on the off chance McVain is elected, to hold his feet to the Conservative Fire.

We are living in dangerous times.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

The key to this thing is getting as many Republicans elected to the House and Senate as possible in order to keep the Dems from running rampant [at least keep them in check] if a Dem takes the White House, or, on the off chance McVain is elected, to hold his feet to the Conservative Fire.

We are living in dangerous times.

Absolutely agreed, Lubbock! Which is why I have decided the better use of my energies is to focus on, and work for, the Congressional House and Senate races instead of worrying about which democrat (because there are now 3 liberals and no conservatives running) will get the office.

[maxparrish]

:sulk: I'm willing to take the chance. If you think that McCain's Supreme Court appointments will be as bad as a demonic rat's, then you have your head too far up your butt. Go ahead, Homes. Throw out the unborn babies with the bath water, just because McCain isn't EVERYTHING you want in a candidate. And that's exactly what you're doing.

You're missing our point. Yes, Hillary/Obama are likely to be more evil than McCain. BUT a) they will be much less effective b) they will enhance, not destroy, the long term prospects of conservatives in the Republican party.

These choices are one's of probability. It is probable that McCain will replace two liberal SCOTUS judges with two more liberals. It is very probable that he will deride and oppose his Republican base by joining democrats on numerious initiatives. It is very probable that RINO's will be appointed to run the party. And it is probable that Republicans will be blamed (as was Jimmy Carter) for the unhappy results.

You are counting on hope that is not supported by experience, but is supported by McCain's promises

Home and I are not tossing McCain aside because he is not everything we hoped for, we are rejecting him because he is a greater danger to the prospects of conservatism than Hillary/Obama

If you want to crucify conservatives on the cross of McCain promises, you are free to say so. But you are not free to expect us to go without a fight.

[Lubbock]

Thanks, Max.

Now I'm back to not voting for him.

I figure by the time November 4th arrives, I'll be brain damaged from yo-yoing.

[maxparrish]

A clarification:

I understand why some on this board will vote for McCain. While I cannot, this is not an easy choice for any of us. If I see any good in this, it is that no one on this board WANTS McCain over other Republicans - we are not among the numbskulls who voted for him in the primaries.

That being said, let us be honest. No one knows if McCain will suddenly become conservative and if he will keep his promises (including the ones I heard him make on the border being secured FIRST).

We just have to do what we feel is right, and let the chips fall where they may. After the election, we will be fighting for our lives no matter who is elected. We will have returned to the era of the 70's (and before) where big democratic majorities dominate Congress. We are marching into the night, and who knows how many years will pass before we see a Republican congress again...perhaps not in my lifetime.

So let's buck up, and as Maggie Thatcher used to say "Don't go wobbly". Work for CONSERVATISM and the rest will follow. We did it in the 70's, we can do it today.

[PrezLeefun]

:sulk: I'm willing to take the chance. If you think that McCain's Supreme Court appointments will be as bad as a demonic rat's, then you have your head too far up your butt. Go ahead, Homes. Throw out the unborn babies with the bath water, just because McCain isn't EVERYTHING you want in a candidate. And that's exactly what you're doing. Then spare us telling everyone how pro-life you are. Will you be able to look at yourself in your mirror when Empress Wang is appointing justices who will solidify a woman's right to kill her baby? Will you not wish you had at least taken a chance on McCain? It's the only chance we have.

WOW. That wasn't only uncalled for it was cold. I know Homes is perfectly capable of defending herself and already has, but that was unseemly and tactless.

Further than that McCain is not the only choice we have. Stop putting yourself in a corner that isnt the only one available. That is the media playing with your head. I am stunned so many people (not just you) are allowing the news to tell them who the nominee is without that person having the all the needed votes yet. There are still other choices and we still have the opportunity to protest, or even put in a protest vote.

Now if you insist on McCain by all means go for it. Who am I to judge or stop you? But dont attack someone else for disagreeing with you. Home's reasons for opposing the man are solid and if she cant vote for him in good conscience then she cant. That doesnt mean she is automatically supporting Hilabitch/Obama.

[Suzie]

I think you have follow what would give the most of what you want so you don't hand it to the ones that will give you the least. Someone will win, and we know it's not going to be our first choice, but if one has a few things that support your beliefs and the other has none, I have to go with the one that at least will maintain a few. To me not voting is only supporting what I don't believe at all. Because I sure won't vote for anyone who has ALWAYS supported every aspect of abortion over someone who has not and at least claims to be pro life and the others do not, but knowing he still has some strikes against him at least it's not completely in the pro abortion relm. I can't let someone who says they will destroy all military families sacrificed for and destroy all the progress we have made when I know there is someone who won't.

At this point we know there will be no one more conservative but we do know that Hillary and Obama certainly would be least. I will vote for what little I can get and put the rest in GOD's hands.

[Naturalized-Texan]

:shame: You're the one who is being foolish. If a demonic rat wins, his/her/its Supreme Court appointments will be the ones to doom us for a generation. What part of that do you not get?
I find myself in the very uncomfortable position of agreeing with you. :biggrin:

In addition to the probability that McCain will name conservative judges and Supreme Court Justices is the certainty that he will pursue the War on Terror to a victory over IslamoFascist terrorism. Hillary or Obama will do neither. That's why I will hold my nose and vote for McCain.

[Lubbock]

. . . But dont attack someone else for disagreeing with you. . . .

Being attacked is not something I have to worry about, unless the attacker is really quick on his feet.

:rotflmbo:
:biggrin:
:rotflmbo:

I've had so many different positions, even I can't keep up with them all.

[PrezLeefun]

^^^ LoL lubbock.

[Elgalad]

It seems to me that if you have to lump everyone on the board right now into two camps, you have those that will do Whatever it takes to keep Hillary from winning the White House and those who believe that no matter what we do or who wins the presidency, we (as Conservatives) have already lost this election.

This difference Does seem to be driving a deep wedge between us, and it's really not helping anything at all to continue lambasting each other for just not 'getting it' when the answer seems so obvious.

Because that answer is Not obvious. There is no "Right choice" here, only individual choices. We're never going to come to any sort of consensus now, in a few weeks, or even by election day, so maybe it might help to tone down the rhetoric just a little?

After all, there Are a few things we all (seem to) agree on wholeheartedly ~ not the least of which, is that no matter Who ends up in the White House, he or she is Not going to be able to ruin this country if we've still got Congress in our corner. And that friends, is something we have a lot more power achieving right now. It doesn't matter what the issue is: abortion, Supreme Court nominees, the war on terror, taxes, etc, the President's hands are tied if Congress opposes him, even if Republicans are in the minority! We all look back on 1994 as a great victory for Conservatism, but let's not forget that Billary tried to ram National Health Care down our throats Before the Contract with America, and it was stopped cold. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_clinton#Health_care_and_other_policy_initi atives)

Heck, a large factor in our reclaiming the House WAS Clinton's determination to force this country farther to the left than it was willing to go!

Now I am not going to belabor this point or start another debate about whether a President Clinton would end the United States as we know it. But let's Please try to remember that no matter how hard we disagree on the Presidential race, ultimately the Congressional and Senate races are far more important right now. And the enemy is not each other.



-Elgalad

[Suzie]

That's true Elgalad, unfortunately, here at home I never get the candidate of choice. Heck they didn't even let me vote for who gets our delegates. I am just screwed all the way around. I will be more screwed if Hillary or Obama wins though.

[Maggie_T]

:sulk: I'm willing to take the chance. If you think that McCain's Supreme Court appointments will be as bad as a demonic rat's, then you have your head too far up your butt. Go ahead, Homes. Throw out the unborn babies with the bath water, just because McCain isn't EVERYTHING you want in a candidate. And that's exactly what you're doing. Then spare us telling everyone how pro-life you are. Will you be able to look at yourself in your mirror when Empress Wang is appointing justices who will solidify a woman's right to kill her baby? Will you not wish you had at least taken a chance on McCain? It's the only chance we have.

Moo, Homes has a point.

Let me tell you what I told someone else in another thread.

May I politely remind my fellow conservatives who are so concerned about the SCOTUS that McCain was one of the Alito bashers? He said that Alito was "too conservative." Oh, and he was also part of the infamous Gang of 14. May I also remind you all - especially those of you for whom abortion is a litmus test - that McCain voted in favor of using taxpayer funds to harvest stem cells from human embryos? That he opposes a constitutional amendment to protect human life because he is afraid that if Roe v. Wade were overruled, women's lives would be "endangered"? (screw the fetus; it's women who will be endagered)

I could go on for ages, but I'd like to remind you of one more thing before I go. For those of you who are so willing to put the SCOTUS in the hands of McCain, may I remind you that the loathed - by true constructionists, at any rate - McCain-Feingold debacle is a direct attack on the 1st Amendment AS OUR FOUNDING FATHERS ORIGINALLY INTEDED IT TO BE? Has it occurred to you that if McCain appoints strict constructionist judges, he will have to appoint judges who will commit to overturning McCain-Feingold? And for those of you who tell me "Oh, yes. He will do that because he is not like Hillary/Obama," I have a couple of lovely twin towers right in downtown Manhattan that I can let you have really cheap.

I know that some people will hate me for saying all of the above. For some unfathonable reason best known to them, they will vote for McCain because they believe that he will "support the military" (McCain is a war hero, remember?).

Have it your way, guys. Just make sure you pray that Teddy Kennedy does not go to Hero McCain with some "proposition" that will end up snatching the chair from under our military's butt. I'm sure you all know that McCain, in a true bi-partisan spirit, is always willing ... nay, make that anxious, to lend an attentive ear to the opposition.

So knock yourselves out. Vote for Hero McCain. But make sure you keep those prayers comming, just in case


Come on, Moo. This is the guy you want to entrust the SCOTUS to?

[Maggie_T]

Maggie, I may lose my standing, because I know, deep down when push comes to shove, if it looks like Texas will tilt Democrat, I will have to cast a vote for this mean, nasty, vile, ill tempered, hateful, back stabbing son of a buck that we know as John McCain.

Despise him as I do, I'm afraid I will have to vote for him if Texas looks iffy.

As bad as he is, he's still not Hillary or Osamabamabammy.

The key to this thing is getting as many Republicans elected to the House and Senate as possible in order to keep the Dems from running rampant [at least keep them in check] if a Dem takes the White House, or, on the off chance McVain is elected, to hold his feet to the Conservative Fire.

We are living in dangerous times.

No, darling. Unlike others, I won't bash you because you don't agree with me. Don't sweat it.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Maggie_T:
Moo, Homes has a point.

:unsmile: I don't?

Come on, Moo. This is the guy you want to entrust the SCOTUS to?

:unsmile: That's not what I said. I've already conceded that he might disappoint. But it's a certainty that Empress Wang &...

:fart2: ...Baaarrraaaccckkk!!!...

:unsmile: ...O[s]ama will not disappoint their backers. Perhaps if McCain appoints two justices, maybe one of them will be conservative. Or maybe neither will be as far left as what we can expect to be appointed by those other two. I don't really trust McCain, but I trust him more than the demonic rats. Don't you?

[Lubbock]

I don't give any credence whatsoever to McVain appointing Conservative Judges to the High Court.

If elected, he will do what it takes to remain a Media Darling, while keeping his lips firmly attached to Teddy's butt cheeks.

[Jack_Savage]

Thanks, Max.

Now I'm back to not voting for him.

I figure by the time November 4th arrives, I'll be brain damaged from yo-yoing.

McCain isn't going to win anyway. There is no real support for him. How are Republicans going to overtake the hugh majority of voters of the left, by people who have to pinch their noses to vote for McCain?

Republicans needed to set some ground rules and stick to them along time ago, settling on a person with leadership and the ability to win or forget it. It embarrasses conservative thinking to have McCain be the standard bearer. What are we fighting for anyway, crumbs?

The country is off on a new direction, placing deviants in the role of teaching our children, with slobs and hate deciding policy. Let the people see what that kind of vote brings to them. Are we somehow a fraid that the deviants will produce positive results? Are we afraid that Pee-Wee Herman is really John Wayne? Do we really think Hillary or Obama will restore a byouant economic optimism? Are we afraid of our own principals? To the degree we resist what the radical left offers, it will persist. Let them be accountable for their lack of vision. Let the people eat the crap Soros, Hillary, Obama and Moveon grows. Experience the reality of what they intend and it will go away.

Sure it will be tough, but who guaranteed everything would be easy. It isn't supposed to be easy! Its supposed to be what it is. Rebuilding our movement would be a very satisfying experience different from the constant frustration we now live under. Unfullfilled expectations, complaining, whining, pointing fingers. Satisfaction is a different place than happy. Participating in fixing the mess we are in is what is next, not waiting for some politican to do it just so we can blame them so we appear right. It is up to us to confront McCain as the bitter pill we created. We either swallow it or spit it out. Either way he doesn't have the votes to win so we might as well reject him and show the little bit of leverage we have to start a new conservative paradigm.

Donate to this forum and other conservative tools. Who is the conservative counterpart to moveon.org. Where are the conservatives backers, like Soros is for the Radical-Left, that will put money into supporting a huge disciplined force of conservatives. If we as a group come together, I'm betting the needs to support our actions will be found. Ann and Rush have put out a good idea, if we back them, we all become stronger. What have we got to lose that isn't allready lost with John McCain.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

PrezLeefun:
WOW. That was only uncalled for it was cold.

:unsmile: Sometimes, the gloves have to come off.

[Maggie_T]

:unsmile: I don't?

Sigh. I never said that, Moo. Work with me, dear.



:unsmile: That's not what I said. I've already conceded that he might disappoint.

Might?! Moo, this bastard started disappointing me with McCain-Feingold, and things have only be going south since then.

But it's a certainty that Empress Wang &...

:fart2: ...Baaarrraaaccckkk!!!...

:unsmile: ...O[s]ama will not disappoint their backers.

Neither will McCain. And I'm referring to the same backers.

Perhaps if McCain appoints two justices, maybe one of them will be conservative. Or maybe neither will be as far left as what we can expect to be appointed by those other two. I don't really trust McCain, but I trust him more than the demonic rats. Don't you?

No. Sorry, love. Can't say I do. McCain bashed Alito as "too conservative," and he (McCain) was part of the Gang of 14. How can you expect me to trust him?

[Suzie]

Might?! Moo, this bastard started disappointing me with McCain-Feingold, and things have only be going south since then.


<object height="355" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/iE0T1tc8yRE&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425"></object>

[DoctorDoom]

If elected, he will do what it takes to remain a Media Darling ...That will not be an issue. The day after he is officially nominated, the DBM hypocrisy and pretense will end and the media campaign of lies, distortions, character assassination and hatred will begin. By November 4th, McCain will be loathed by every American, and the RAT bastard will win by a landslide that will make the Reagan-Mondale rout seem like a squeaker. It would not surprise me to see him withdraw and grant the victory to the RATs before the first vote is cast.

The only reason I will vote for McCain is that I want to be able to tell my kids that I voted against the RAT fascists who will destroy our country.

[Maggie_T]

<OBJECT height=355 width=425>
&ampampampnbsp
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/iE0T1tc8yRE&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425"></OBJECT>

Well, since Fred is not in the race anymore, your point is sort of moot, innit dear.


Suze, it's true that Fred had that flaw. But he made up for it by being extremely conservative in all the other things. McCain is the total opposite.

Look, I know that you will vote for McCain because (you think) he is pro-military. Go ahead. You're entitled to your opinion. But don't take your frustrations out on me just because I point out truths about McCain that you'd rather not acknowledge.

McCain has a very good war record, I never denied it. But after that, ever since he got into power, he has stabbed conservatives in the back A LOT MORE OFTEN than not. If that does not concern you because you put the military above everything else, suit yourself.

For me, it's just not good enough. And I am entitled to my opinion even when it does not match yours.

[Jack_Savage]

No. Sorry, love. Can't say I do. McCain bashed Alito as "too conservative," and he (McCain) was part of the Gang of 14. How can you expect me to trust him?

I don't trust McCain Maggie and I don't think anyone here does or anyone who visits here does.

Its difficult to bounce back untill you hit bottom, and for Conservatives, McCain is close to the bottom. But were not quite there yet. More people have to get it. Let it happen. Quit kidding ourselves into expecting McCain to be who he isn't. Might as well let the party and media, McCain panders to, the Democrats and CNN, take the White House, and then show us all how they are doing,and be accountable for what that thinking brings, instead of voting for McCain and letting him do it in our name.

If they can restore the traditional values that built this country great. If they don't then it will be them who will have to account for it. If we vote for wiser people in other offices and build on that for the future maybe we have a chance. But just continually going along with it complaining all the way, will just produce more of our plight.

[Suzie]

No frustrations here, as DF said in the other thread the truths need to be told, good and bad. Fred also supported McCain in this election until he decided to run himself.
At the start of this year, Thompson was even making phone calls on behalf of McCain’s campaign. Thompson has built little support in New Hampshire, so his endorsement would not mean a lot for McCain there. source (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7682_Page2.html)

The majority here trusted Fred to be their president. So some will naturally want to consider his judgment. Not to trust him seems strange considering they wanted him in control of it all.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

:unsmile: Sometimes, the gloves have to come off.

Against me? I didn't do ANYTHING to you, didn't call YOU names, didn't tell YOU you have your head up your butt. And don't even TRY to impugn me when it comes to the issue of abortion. :mad:

McCain is a liar, he is a traitor to Conservatives and Republicans, yet I'm supposed to believe him NOW? Because he may be the candidate against Hillary? Sorry, McCain's actions speak louder than his, or your words. I don't trust him.

And while I humbly and RESPECTFULLY (unlike YOU treated me) disagree with Doc on the who, I do share a similar reasoning.

One of the main reasons I will NOT vote for McCain is that I want to be able to tell my kids that I DID NOT vote for the RAT-in-Republican-clothing who will destroy this country by traitorously throwing away Conservatism.

[PrezLeefun]

:unsmile: Sometimes, the gloves have to come off.

Gloves my tookus. That was more like a muzzle coming off.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Come on, Moo. This is the guy you want to entrust the SCOTUS to?
You didn't ask me, but I would trust McCain with SCOTUS FAR more than Hillary or Obama. Moreover, of the options that we will be faced with in November, the ONLY candidate I would trust to be Commander-in-Chief is McCain. He is the ONLY one who will pursue the War on Terror to defeat IslamoFascist terrorists.

Consequently, I have no choice but to hold my nose and vote for McCain. I know you'll do what you want, but that should also be your choice.

[DesertFox]

Originally posted by Maggie:
Finally, someone who does not fall for the "Oh, but McCain is a hero" schtick. You haven't been reading, then. I've been saying this since 2001.

[jayson]

I do find it funny that there is still a conservative in the race and no one is paying him any attention.

:thk:

Pro-life, pro-second amendment, pro-Constitution, pro-states' rights, pro-sound economic policy, pro-individual. But we can't vote for him because why, again?

You all would rather vote for someone you hate, than vote for someone who you agree 95% with. I find this shocking.

At least I can sleep soundly at night knowing that I never had to face such a difficult choice.

[PrezLeefun]

^^^ Are you talking about Huck?

[Jack_Savage]

^^^ Are you talking about Huck?


Huckabee wants to be McCains VP. But he has to go to the back of the line behind the members of the Gang of 14:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_14

[Neil Peart]

Pro-life, pro-second amendment, pro-Constitution, pro-states' rights, pro-sound economic policy, pro-individual. But we can't vote for him because why, again? Anti-GWOT. Many of us consider that the most important issue out of all of them, and WILL NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES vote for someone who is against the war.

[jayson]

Anti-GWOT. Many of us consider that the most important issue out of all of them, and WILL NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES vote for someone who is against the war.

Suit yourself. Enjoy voting for a liberal.

[jayson]

McCain isn't going to win anyway. There is no real support for him. How are Republicans going to overtake the hugh majority of voters of the left, by people who have to pinch their noses to vote for McCain?

I can't believe I am going to say this, but here it goes. I agree with you.

I've been saying this since I came back... Nominating anyone who is pro-war in a time when 70% of America is against the war is political suicide. He will not win in November, especially so if the Democrats smarten up and nominate Obama. I doubt he could even take on Hillary, after a DNC smear campaign. Oh how they are going to have fun with McCain's "100 years in Iraq" remark.

[Suzie]

Suit yourself. Enjoy voting for a liberal.

He said he wouldn't vote for Ron Paul.

[Rhino]

Is anybody listening? Whichever of the two monkeys wins the election, we give it hell, day in and day out, and don't let up until he follows the Constitution. That, plus a good conservative Congress, should be a force to deflate the asshole a lot.I think the primaries have showm quite clearly that they don't listen to us.

[Rhino]

You haven't been reading, then. I've been saying this since 2001.:yeahthat: Quite a few of us have been saying that for a very long time.

[Rhino]

I've been saying this since I came back... Nominating anyone who is pro-war in a time when 70% of America is against the war is political suicide.Still parroting that lie, I see. It seems to me that the only person currently supporting that false notion is the one who has absolutely zero chance of winning. You can support whatever position you want, but blatantly lying about it just makes you look ridiculous. If what you say was true, the surrender candidates would be way out in front. But the truth is the opposite.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

HomeschoolrsRUs:
I ... didn't call YOU names, ...

:sulk: That's just low. I didn't call you names, nor did I accuse you of calling me names. I've had a lot of people accuse me of calling names when I didn't, but I never expected that of HomeschoolrsRUs.

[jayson]

Still parroting that lie, I see. It seems to me that the only person currently supporting that false notion is the one who has absolutely zero chance of winning. You can support whatever position you want, but blatantly lying about it just makes you look ridiculous. If what you say was true, the surrender candidates would be way out in front. But the truth is the opposite.

The "surrender candidates" are way out in front. Look at even the most conservative states that have voted. Tennessee? Clinton got more votes than McCain and Romney combined and over one and a half times what Huckabee, the winner, got.

South Carolina? Obama took 295,000 votes and McCain, the winner, got 147,000... over twice the amount.

Oklahoma? Clinton 228,000, McCain with 122,000. Georgia? Obama took 700,000 votes to Huckabee's 326,000.

The only states so far with more Republican than Democrat votes is Utah and Arizona, which have a whopping 5 and 10 electoral votes respectively.

I stand by my words... we are going down in November whether we like it or not... all this bickering about McCain and Huckabee is just wasted breath in my opinion, because what will it matter? McCain will get shredded in the general election... he will just be another has-run a la Dole.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Anti-GWOT. Many of us consider that the most important issue out of all of them, and WILL NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES vote for someone who is against the war.
Absolutely! Ron Paul wants to surrender to the terrorists and endanger the lives of millions, if not tens of millions, of innocent American men, women, and CHILDREN.

[jayson]

Absolutely! Ron Paul wants to surrender to the terrorists and endanger the lives of millions, if not tens of millions, of innocent American men, women, and CHILDREN.

Do you have that memorized or do you copy and paste from a Word document... because you sure say that a lot.

[DesertFox]

One wonders where this "70% of America is against the war" lie came from. If anything, 70% of America is FOR the war.

[Rhino]

The "surrender candidates" are way out in front. Look at even the most conservative states that have voted. Tennessee? Clinton got more votes than McCain and Romney combined and over one and a half times what Huckabee, the winner, got.

South Carolina? Obama took 295,000 votes and McCain, the winner, got 147,000... over twice the amount.

Oklahoma? Clinton 228,000, McCain with 122,000. Georgia? Obama took 700,000 votes to Huckabee's 326,000.None of those candidates advocate surrender.

I stand by my words... we are going down in November whether we like it or not... all this bickering about McCain and Huckabee is just wasted breath in my opinion, because what will it matter? McCain will get shredded in the general election... he will just be another has-run a la Dole.I don't disagree with that. But that wasn't the point I was addressing.

[jayson]

None of those candidates advocate surrender.

No politician is advocating surrender... and you are the ones using the word in the end, anyway, so this argument is moot.

[jayson]

One wonders where this "70% of America is against the war" lie came from. If anything, 70% of America is FOR the war.

I don't know what good this is going to do, since you will discredit it as liberal/big media/whatever else.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/08/war.poll/index.html

Sixty-eight percent of poll respondents opposed the war, setting a record. The level of opposition is slightly up from last month and 1 percentage point higher than the previous record of 67 percent, first set in December 2006 in a CNN/Opinion Research survey.


EDIT: Here is another link that has, what seems to be, a summary of all polls taken recently regarding Iraq:

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

[DoctorDoom]

I've been saying this since I came back... Nominating anyone who is pro-war in a time when 70% of America is against the war is political suicide.Use this, Paulorrhoid.

<table align="center" bgcolor="400000" bordercolor="CCCCCC" border="4" cellpadding="8"><tr><td><div align="center"><font face="Verdana" color="yellow" size="7"><b>* CLUEPON *<br><font size="5">This cluepon entitles the bearer to<br>one free clue at any local retailer.<br><font size="3">Valid worldwide. No expiration date.</font><br></font></b> </font></div></td></tr></table>

What the people are against is not the GWOT, but against surrenderist cowards like your senile idol, RuPaul, and against shackling our forces in Iraq by allowing treasonous politicians to dictate military actions.

Our brave warriors are reluctant to wage an effective campaign because they are under constant threats from loathsome sons of bitches like Paul, Reid, Murtha, Pelosi and the rest of that cadre of despicable traitors.

The same bullshit resulted in our loss in Vietnam. Politicians and "peace" pukes sold out our country and made futile the deaths of the tens of thousands of our bravest and best. Fonda, Kerry, Clarke, Kronkite et al should have been arrested, tried, convicted and hung.

And the same process for dealing with the vermin is desperately needed today.

<center><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Politics/TombstoneGallows.jpg" /></center>

[UnkHiram]

We just have to do what we feel is right, and let the chips fall where they may.

Wiser words have never been spoken. Personally I will not attack those they cant bring them selves to vote for McCain. I am still not certain that I will be able to do that once I enter the voting booth. I know I will vote against him in the Primary, probably for Fred. I realize by my own defination this is a "Wasted" vote but I wont vote for Huckabee.

For the Record: I will NEVER vote for a candidate that voted to cut off funding to our troops while they were being shot at. I do not support candidates that backstab our soldiers!

[gnome]

One wonders where this "70% of America is against the war" lie came from. If anything, 70% of America is FOR the war.

I think it probably depends on how the surveys were worded. Ask Americans if they wish for the fighting to come to an end and a vast majority will say yes. They will not, however, all agree on the same policy.

[DoctorDoom]

Ask them whether they prefer to see the fighting end in victory or in defeat.

[jayson]

Use this, Paulorrhoid.

<table align="center" bgcolor="#400000" border="4" bordercolor="#cccccc" cellpadding="8"><tbody><tr><td>* CLUEPON *
This cluepon entitles the bearer to
one free clue at any local retailer.
Valid worldwide. No expiration date.

</td></tr></tbody></table>

At least something in life is still free.

Our brave warriors are reluctant to wage an effective campaign because they are under constant threats from loathsome sons of bitches like Paul, Reid, Murtha, Pelosi and the rest of that cadre of despicable traitors.

Before you blow a blood vessel, good Doctor, let me remind you that Ron Paul put forth legislation that would have declared war on Iraq up or down in clear and concise verbiage. None of this murky police action shit where we have to split hairs over meanings of words. Of course it was shot down in Congress because it was a bad political move for the gang of 535.

Guess what, a formal declaration of war would have prevented all this bitching from the left and we would have been done by now. Instead, Bush and the gang chose the politically better way of going in on unclear terms with no real objectives. And now we are bogged down in a helluva mess because we failed to clearly state our intentions.


The same bullshit resulted in our loss in Vietnam. Politicians and "peace" pukes sold out our country and made futile the deaths of the tens of thousands of our bravest and best. Fonda, Kerry, Clarke, Kronkite et al should have been arrested, tried, convicted and hung.


Then again, we didn't declare war there, either. Notice a pattern?

Had we declared war and fought it like one, Vietnam would have been won, too. Instead we chose to pussy foot around everything.

I'm not going to sit here and tell you that war is not the answer, because in some cases it very well is. Do I believe war was the answer to Iraq? No. But now that we are in it, we can either buck up and fight it like a real war or leave. Since the political bunch don't want to loosen up the ROEs because they