Six reasons to vote for John McCain

[EveningStar]

John Paul Stevens, age 88

Antonin Scalia, age 72

Anthony Kennedy, age 71

David Souter, age 68

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, age 75

Stephen Breyer, age 69



(Yes. I know it's been said before.)

[Maggie_T]

Best reasons NOT to vote for McCain:

He's a RINO.

He's a Teddy Kennedy buddy.

He wants to shut down Gitmo.

He sniffs in disapproval at Bush's tax cuts.

He's wobbly on illegal immigration.

You can't trust him.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Good points, ES. Thanks for the reminder.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:moo: I agree, ES has six good points.

[EveningStar]

:moo: I agree, ES has six good points.
This is not original. I've heard several conservative pundits say the same thing. I just wanted to issue a reminder.

[Riverboat]

Well, here's two more:

1. He's not Barrrack Obama
2. He's not Hillary Clinton

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Best reasons NOT to vote for McCain:

He's a RINO.

He's a Teddy Kennedy buddy.

He wants to shut down Gitmo.

He sniffs in disapproval at Bush's tax cuts.

He's wobbly on illegal immigration.

You can't trust him.

And still more, Sis ...

He's NOT a Conservative . . .

He's NOT Ronald Reagan . . .

He's NOT going to get MY vote.

[dPrasse]

(Yes. I know it's been said before.)


And your point ?
McCain has done NOTHING to show me that he'd appoint anyone worthwhile ...

The Senate and House is where we need to focus since the RINO Party has tried to pass off a full fledge Anti-Conservative as a conservative ...

[Beowulf]

Best reasons NOT to vote for McCain:

He's a RINO.

He's a Teddy Kennedy buddy.

He wants to shut down Gitmo.

He sniffs in disapproval at Bush's tax cuts.

He's wobbly on illegal immigration.

You can't trust him.

SisterMaggie, forget trying to reason with anyone with obvious facts against McCain. Too many will again "consider the alternative" and vote McPain JUST to vote against Hitlery or Osama. Here's another fact:

McCain/Feingold.

Oh that's right, the die hards will overlook that, too!

[Jack_Savage]

Best reasons NOT to vote for McCain:

He's a RINO.

He's a Teddy Kennedy buddy.

He wants to shut down Gitmo.

He sniffs in disapproval at Bush's tax cuts.

He's wobbly on illegal immigration.

You can't trust him.

Well said. I would just add he is so embarrassing to listen to, and he is on his best behavour! If he were to get elected, I am not going to have to fake support for this self absorbed camera addict who's entire career has been spent groveling to the elite-left for agreement at how great he is.

[ThomasMore]

McCain said that Alito was too conservative a judicial nominee to support.

Bottom line, we cannot count on McCain to nominate conservatives to the judiciary -- he views it as more important to "reach across the aisle" to the Democrats.

On the other hand, while McCain is unreliable at best and most definitely not motivated by conservative ideals, both Hillary and Obama are dyed-in-the-wool liberal socialists. The last Clinton administration gave us luminaries such as Janet Reno, Joycelyn Elders, the corrupt Ron Brown, etc.

Obama has demonstrated that he is even further to the left than the Clintons.

You may count on more Ginsburgs and Breyers from either, or even the elevation of some justices from California's Ninth Circus Court of Appeals.

For conservatives who hope to let the Democrats have the train-wreck and thereby demonstrate to the public at large how bad the Dems are: consider that the public hasn't figured it out after Johnson, Carter or Clinton White Houses, or the Congressional antics of Pelosi and Reid, Dan Rostenkowski, Jim Wright and all the other self-serving, corrupt, destructive Democrat Congresses. If you think the public will learn, it has shown no sign of it so far.

Pick your poison.

[DeclinetoState]

There are only one and a half reasons to vote for John McCain (which may be enough):

He's not Barack Obama (on paper, at least, the likely Democrat nominee).

He's not Hillary Clinton. But I can only give him half credit for this because (on paper, at least) she doesn't appear likely to be the Democrat nominee. Not only that, but this:

http://www.texemarrs.com/images/mccain_hillary_lovefest.jpg

[Maggie_T]

Five in my favor. Ok, seven with 1/2 points from both Thomas and Decline.

I win! :neener:

Ok, just kidding. Truth be said, I think we're screwed either way. While it's true that Hillary and HUSSEIN would be disastrous for the country, I don't see how McCain can be any better.

HE IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE. For crying out loud, guys. That's a dinosaur in the living room that you simply refuse to acknowledge.

I agree with Ann Coulter (but this should be no surprise to anyone). If Hillary or HUSSEIN win, I do believe that Americans will get such a rude awakening, they just might get scared enough to vote the right way next time. Lefties are what? 20% of the country? Which means that not ALL Americans are stupid.

OTOH, if we get McCain there will be NO house cleaning and we will be stuck with RINOs for the rest of our lives. We will be stuck with people like McCain who, as Thomas very accurately pointed out, insist on "reaching out accross the aisle" to the democrats, which means caving in to them in the interest of "bi-partisanship."

Again, as Thomas said, pick your poison.

[RogerFGay]

John Paul Stevens, age 88

Antonin Scalia, age 72

Anthony Kennedy, age 71

David Souter, age 68

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, age 75

Stephen Breyer, age 69

(Yes. I know it's been said before.)



Assuming this is valid logic and McCain is in for the max. 8 years, it looks like only one reason. The oldest behind Stevens will still be younger than Stevens is now in 8 years. So are you assured of passing a bill for forced early retirement of judges, or what? If Stevens lives to be 100, you've got nothin.

[DoctorDoom]

I agree with Ann Coulter (but this should be no surprise to anyone). If Hillary or HUSSEIN win, I do believe that Americans will get such a rude awakening, they just might get scared enough to vote the right way next time.The rude awakening might not be merely rude, but fatal. When the fire is burning through the bedroom door, being awakened won't do a shred of good. And when a RAT-dominated Congress (the GOP losses on Nov 4th will be staggering) can do anything it pleases with a guarantee of a rubber-stamp approval from the POTUS, the chance is zero that ANY freedom will still exist in 2012.

Y'all think there will BE an election in 2012? Don't count on it. When the RATs take charge this time, they will never lose control again. Their lust for power is so insane that they will kill their opponents to get and keep it.

McCain is the one GOP choice that I didn't want, but I'd rather have one of the lesser demons in charge than Satan himself. IAC, it's probable that McCain will be the next POTUS. Neither RAT is electable.

Clinton can't handle the pressure of a campaign. How will she survive four years as the POTUS? And even the DBM are abandoning her. The Clinton dynasty is fading away, not very gracefully.

Obama is a media-inflated empty suit. He says absolutely nothing with endearing charisma and eloquence, but he can't hack unscripted communication. Remove the teleprompter and he goes into withdrawal. When he gets a question for which "change", "hope" and "future" are not the answers, he has the deer-in-the-headlights response. "Now WTF do I do?"

Beyond that, when the Denver fiasco begins, there will be hell in the streets. We older folks know the significance of "Recreate 68" (http://recreate68.org/).

Welcome to the "Re-create 68" website, your virtual activists' Convergence Center for the Denver Democratic National Convention of 2008. This website was created for all the grassroots people who are tired of being sold out by the Democratic Party.There's trouble brewing, folks, and blood may very well flow in the streets of Denver.

If the superdelegates are the final arbiters of the RAT candidate, no matter which one they choose, there will be fury from the supporters of the other.

Unless the superdelegates say "F**K YOU!" to them and select a RAT candidate who does have a chance, they won't gain the WH.

And the Soros/Answer/MorOn traitors must realize by now that no RAT will surrender in Iraq.

It's going to be an interesting five days in August.

[dPrasse]

OTOH, if we get McCain there will be NO house cleaning and we will be stuck with RINOs for the rest of our lives.

Just about as funny (in a real stupid way ) as Conservatives asking Black -Americans why they , on majority , vote for Dimocrats , even though they are being lied to , screwed and then told to like , it by the Dim Party ...

Some think it is better to be screwed over by "Our Guys/Ladies " ... well McCain and the National GOP is/are NOT "MINE" ... Ronald Reagan was the reason I joined the Repub Party , but , the Ronald Reagan Repub Party has left ME ... just as the Harry Thruman Democrat party left Reagan ..


We will be stuck with people like McCain who, as Thomas very accurately pointed out, insist on "reaching out accross the aisle" to the democrats, which means caving in to them in the interest of "bi-partisanship."

Again, as Thomas said, pick your poison.The 2008 GOP is the Nevill chamberlin Party of the 30's and McCain is our Nevill Chamberlin ......

Know the election that would be best for the US , IMHO ?

What if we could have candidates on par with Harry S. Thruman and Ronald Reagan running for the top position of America and the world ?

The voting for the "least slimey " candidate has to stop ... 08 is just as good a time to start as any ...

[Kathekon]

The notion that because Obama would be a disaster that would usher in a new conservative wave in reaction is a lame strategy and hostage to events. It also presumes that what conservatives recognize as disastrous (surrender of US autonomy to international organizations, high taxes, massive regulation, socialist energy policies, etc.) would not be swallowed by a majority as necessary and desirable. For example, the Great Society was a known disaster with hideous social consequences. However, even modest welfare reform was not possible until 30 years later with a triangulating president and a temporarily conservative and principled Congress. In other words, in DC bad shit has a really long half-life.

Also, it is not just the Supreme Court but all the other federal judgeships and all the agency policy positions. The potential for lasting harm is enormous. Republicans do sometimes nominate loser judges (Souter) but Democrats NEVER permit ANY conservatives in ANY position of importance.

Bush-Hastert-Delay-Lott ruined the Republican brand name. The spoiled rich are ready to declare war on middle class values and transform America the way George Soros wants. And they have the momentum and media power to pull it off this year. McCain offers a chance to install a 4-year grace period under a well-liked "maverick" centrist with credibility on foreign policy. A buffer of 4 years for the Right to get its act together in opposition to a Lefty Congress is BY FAR the better choice on the menu.

The notion that there would be no substance difference in policy or judicial appointments between McCain and Obama (especially with a Democrat Congress) is indefensibly stupid.

[Riverboat]

Only 141 posts so far? This one post by Kathekon puts her in POM status.

[DeclinetoState]

Kathekon's a male.

[dPrasse]

The potential for lasting harm is enormous.
Agreed 100 %

McCain offers a chance to install a 4-year grace period under a well-liked "maverick" centrist with credibility on foreign policy. A buffer of 4 years for the Right to get its act together in opposition to a Lefty Congress is BY FAR the better choice on the menu.

I thought we've just had a 8 yr grace period after 8 yrs of the Clintoon administration .

Instead of building a Conservative party , we've spent 8 yrs of defending Bush supporting Kennedy sponsored education , McVain /Feingold , 8 yrs of fighting "our guy" on illegal immigration , "Our Party" having absolutely no energy policy , a bitter attle againt "our President" over the nomination of political croney Harriet Meyers to the SCotUS ...

The few positions that Bush has done well with , Mccain is opposed to ... extending the tax cuts and gitmo ...

The notion that there would be no substance difference in policy or judicial appointments between McCain and Obama (especially with a Democrat Congress) is indefensibly stupid.

It may be equally indefensibly stupid to assume that the (R) behind McVains name means he would support any worthwhile Judges or do anything to slow the slide of this country into a Socialist cess pool ...

I am still waiting for McCain to make any stands that are supported by his past actions (not just election year rhetoric) ....:confused:

[Kathy30]

McCain is a liberal. The obamination is a Che-style communist and HiLIARy is a socialist.

[Elgalad]

The bottom line is:

There's only One reason to vote 'for' McVain, he's not Hillary or Obama.

If you choose to believe that his Liberalism is somehow easier to stomach than theirs, then go ahead and vote 'for' him.


I remain unconvinced that it's worthwhile to vote for Any Liberal.


-Elgalad

[Kathy30]

No one else is running! That's the problem. There isn't a conservative in this race at all. If you don't make a decision then the decision will be made for you. If there are those who believe that allowing a democrats to get into office so things will get so bad that we'll elect a conservative next time is deluding themselves. It's like the taliban "We lost this battle but the real fight will come next time". There is no next time. This is not a strategic failure. This is a catastrophic failure. Especially if the democrat is the obamination. His hatred of this country oozes from every pore. Even his speeches remove the government from the hands of the people into his own. Have you paid attention "My White House, my attorney general, My generals". Everything, all of the trappings of governance are described as his personal property when he owns these things.

Given the choices we have, not the ones we would wish for certainly, but what we have, do you really want someone else making this decision for you?

[RogerFGay]

McCain is a liberal.

If he were, we wouldn't have a problem with him for not being conservative enough. (Please don't misuse the term "liberal.")

[Elgalad]

No one else is running! That's the problem. There isn't a conservative in this race at all. If you don't make a decision then the decision will be made for you. If there are those who believe that allowing a democrats to get into office so things will get so bad that we'll elect a conservative next time is deluding themselves. It's like the taliban "We lost this battle but the real fight will come next time". There is no next time. This is not a strategic failure. This is a catastrophic failure. Especially if the democrat is the obamination. His hatred of this country oozes from every pore. Even his speeches remove the government from the hands of the people into his own. Have you paid attention "My White House, my attorney general, My generals". Everything, all of the trappings of governance are described as his personal property when he owns these things.

Given the choices we have, not the ones we would wish for certainly, but what we have, do you really want someone else making this decision for you?

The decision was already Made when McVain won the nomination by default.

There are no possible good outcomes left from this election. You're welcome to keep believing that there might be a 'less disastrous' one, and that's your prerogative.

But I simply don't.


-Elgalad

[Maggie_T]

I thought we've just had a 8 yr grace period after 8 yrs of the Clintoon administration.

So did I. Guess we're just too stupid to know, dPrasse.

Instead of building a Conservative party , we've spent 8 yrs of defending Bush supporting Kennedy sponsored education , McVain /Feingold , 8 yrs of fighting "our guy" on illegal immigration , "Our Party" having absolutely no energy policy , a bitter attle againt "our President" over the nomination of political croney Harriet Meyers to the SCotUS ...

The few positions that Bush has done well with , Mccain is opposed to ... extending the tax cuts and gitmo ...

:claps:

It may be equally indefensibly stupid to assume that the (R) behind McVains name means he would support any worthwhile Judges or do anything to slow the slide of this country into a Socialist cess pool ...

Thanks, dPrasse.

[Maggie_T]

McCain is a liberal. The obamination is a Che-style communist and HiLIARy is a socialist.

Actually, I'd put The Bitch in the same Marxist category as HUSSEIN. But I agree with you on the whole, Kathy.

[TeenageRepublican]

I'd take McCain over Hillary or Barack any day. He's honest about his intentions. Hillary and Barack want to rewrite the Constitution and they never say it up front and plain, otherwise they wouldn't be half as popular as they are now.

[Maggie_T]

The rude awakening might not be merely rude, but fatal. When the fire is burning through the bedroom door, being awakened won't do a shred of good. And when a RAT-dominated Congress (the GOP losses on Nov 4th will be staggering) can do anything it pleases with a guarantee of a rubber-stamp approval from the POTUS, the chance is zero that ANY freedom will still exist in 2012.

Y'all think there will BE an election in 2012? Don't count on it. When the RATs take charge this time, they will never lose control again. Their lust for power is so insane that they will kill their opponents to get and keep it.

Well, I've been saying that since we lost CONgress in 06, and I've been called an alarmist, a conspiracy nut, and other terms of endearment (not necessarily by Freecers). I wish you better luck, brother Doc.


McCain is the one GOP choice that I didn't want, but I'd rather have one of the lesser demons in charge than Satan himself.

Well, you don't have to vote for Satan when our own candidate is so willing to play footsie with him.

IAC, it's probable that McCain will be the next POTUS. Neither RAT is electable.

I can't bring myself to be so optimistic. As Sir Winston Churchill once said, The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

Elitist? And why not? Any of you heard the inevitable starry-eyed cretin gush about HUSSEIN on the radio? Enough to give you heartburn on an empty stomach.

Yeah, go on, guys. Give me the usual "Aw, those people never vote." Really? It wasn't me who put Clinton in the WH. Nor the one who intends to vote for "that patriotic conservative," Ron Paul.

Clinton can't handle the pressure of a campaign. How will she survive four years as the POTUS? And even the DBM are abandoning her. The Clinton dynasty is fading away, not very gracefully.

Obama is a media-inflated empty suit. He says absolutely nothing with endearing charisma and eloquence, but he can't hack unscripted communication. Remove the teleprompter and he goes into withdrawal. When he gets a question for which "change", "hope" and "future" are not the answers, he has the deer-in-the-headlights response. "Now WTF do I do?"

The only way that would work in our favor was if we had someone who, unlike McCain, will take advantage of Hillary's and HUSSEIN's weaknesses come the general debates. As I said in another thread, I hope McCain's lust for power is big enough that he'll go for his opponent's jugular in the debates. But if he insists on acting "bi-partisan," "conciliatory," and similar pious imbecilities, whoever the demunist candidate is, will mop the floor with him. It will be easy enough even for an empty suit like Obama.

And the Soros/Answer/MorOn traitors must realize by now that no RAT will surrender in Iraq.

Hmmmm ... :question:

It's going to be an interesting five days in August.


That's for sure.

[Maggie_T]

He's honest about his intentions.

Yes, that's what scares the holy sugar out of me.

Hillary and Barack want to rewrite the Constitution and they never say it up front and plain, otherwise they wouldn't be half as popular as they are now.


Forget the Constitution. People hardly know what that is anymore. I'm ready to bet they don't care, either. Hillary and Obama are as frank as to their Marxist intentions as McCain is about his.

They both promised up and down that they will institute universal (a.k.a socialist) healthcare. And people are lapping it up as if it was honey. And I'm not talking strictly liberals, either.

[TeenageRepublican]

Yes, that's what scares the holy sugar out of me.It's better than a liar. It's better to know what you're getting than to get it randomly and find out that your candidate lied to you.


Forget the Constitution. People hardly know what that is anymore. I'm ready to bet they don't care, either. Hillary and Obama are as frank as to their Marxist intentions as McCain is about his.

They both promised up and down that they will institute universal (a.k.a socialist) healthcare. And people are lapping it up as if it was honey. And I'm not talking strictly liberals, either.


I'm not sure about Barack, but Hillary Clinton does want to rewrite the Constitution. George Soros is one of her buddies and Soros has plainly said that the Constitution should be rewritten. Plus, in college, she wrote a Marxist paper.
John McCain shot Commies while she was doing that.

[Maggie_T]

It's better than a liar. It's better to know what you're getting than to get it randomly and find out that your candidate lied to you.

Sigh. Teen, honey, let me explain something to you. A person who tells everyone he's a conservative when he is not IS a liar. Therefore, McCain IS a liar.


I'm not sure about Barack, but Hillary Clinton does want to rewrite the Constitution. George Soros is one of her buddies and Soros has plainly said that the Constitution should be rewritten. Plus, in college, she wrote a Marxist paper.

I never said Hillary or HUSSEIN would not try to change the Constitution. I just said most people these days are too ignorant to care.

John McCain shot Commies while she was doing that.

And now, he kisses their ass and plays footsie with them.

Your point?

[TeenageRepublican]

Sigh. Teen, honey, let me explain something to you. A person who tells everyone he's a conservative when he is not IS a liar. Therefore, McCain IS a liar.Actually, a liar is someone who intends to tell lies. Someone who thinks that their conservative and is stating their opinion is not a liar. I honestly do believe McCain thinks he's conserative because he's so very far off in to his own little world to realize he's a liberal. Probably due to the fact he has some mental issues.
They may be falsehoods, but he doesn't think they are.
He may be lying, but I don't think he is. Here's the dictionary definition to back up my statement.
Main Entry: <SUP>3</SUP>lie
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): lied ; ly·ing<OBJECT class=inlineimg title="Big Grin" style="MARGIN-LEFT: 2px; VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle; MARGIN-RIGHT: 2px" codeBase=http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,29,0 height=12 alt="" width=12 data=data:application/x-oleobject;base64,IGkzJfkDzxGP0ACqAGhvEzwhRE9DVFlQR SBIVE1MIFBVQkxJQyAiLS8vVzNDLy9EVEQgSFRNTCA0LjAgVHJ hbnNpdGlvbmFsLy9FTiI+DQo8SFRNTD48SEVBRD4NCjxNRVRBI Gh0dHAtZXF1aXY9Q29udGVudC1UeXBlIGNvbnRlbnQ9InRleHQ vaHRtbDsgY2hhcnNldD13aW5kb3dzLTEyNTIiPg0KPE1FVEEgY 29udGVudD0iTVNIVE1MIDYuMDAuNjAwMC4xNjY0MCIgbmFtZT1 HRU5FUkFUT1I+PC9IRUFEPg0KPEJPRFk+DQo8UD4mbmJzcDs8L 1A+PC9CT0RZPjwvSFRNTD4NCg== border=0 classid="clsid:D</OBJECT>/'lī-i[ng]/
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English </I>leogan; akin to Old High German </I>liogan to lie, Old Church Slavonic </I>lŭgati
intransitive senses
1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive</I> </I>
2 : to create a false or misleading impression</I>
transitive senses : to bring about by telling lies <</I>lied his way out of trouble</I>></I>
synonyms LIE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('lie');), PREVARICATE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('prevaricate');), EQUIVOCATE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('equivocate');), PALTER (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('palter');), FIB (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('fib ');)</I>mean to tell an untruth. LIE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('lie ');)</I>is the blunt term, imputing dishonesty <</I>lied about where he had been</I>>. PREVARICATE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('prevaricate ');)</I>softens the bluntness of LIE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('lie ');)</I>by implying quibbling or confusing the issue <DURING I < to best his did witness the hearings>prevaricate>. EQUIVOCATE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('equivocate ');)</I>implies using words having more than one sense so as to seem to say one thing but intend another <</I>equivocated endlessly in an attempt to mislead her inquisitors</I>>. PALTER (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('palter ');)</I>implies making unreliable statements of fact or intention or insincere promises <A I < swindler>paltering with his investors</I>>. FIB (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('fib ');)</I>applies to a telling of a trivial untruth <</I>fibbed about the price of the new suit</I>>.
Main Entry: li·ar<OBJECT class=inlineimg title="Big Grin" style="MARGIN-LEFT: 2px; VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle; MARGIN-RIGHT: 2px" codeBase=http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,29,0 height=12 alt="" width=12 data=data:application/x-oleobject;base64,IGkzJfkDzxGP0ACqAGhvEzwhRE9DVFlQR SBIVE1MIFBVQkxJQyAiLS8vVzNDLy9EVEQgSFRNTCA0LjAgVHJ hbnNpdGlvbmFsLy9FTiI+DQo8SFRNTD48SEVBRD4NCjxNRVRBI Gh0dHAtZXF1aXY9Q29udGVudC1UeXBlIGNvbnRlbnQ9InRleHQ vaHRtbDsgY2hhcnNldD13aW5kb3dzLTEyNTIiPg0KPE1FVEEgY 29udGVudD0iTVNIVE1MIDYuMDAuNjAwMC4xNjY0MCIgbmFtZT1 HRU5FUkFUT1I+PC9IRUFEPg0KPEJPRFk+DQo8UD4mbmJzcDs8L 1A+PC9CT0RZPjwvSFRNTD4NCg== border=0 classid="clsid:D</OBJECT>
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'lī(-&)r</I>
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English </I>leogere, from </I>leogan to lie</I> -- more at LIE (http://javascript<b></b>:lookWord('lie');)</I>
: one that tells lies

[Naturalized-Texan]

TR: Why all the blank space in your post #33? On my screen there are two vertical blank spaces, each 7 1/2 inches long.

[TeenageRepublican]

I don't see it. Mine's an inch at the most. I'll try to fix it for you by making it closer.

[TeenageRepublican]

Better?

[roguemerc]

Actually, I'd put The Bitch in the same Marxist category as HUSSEIN. But I agree with you on the whole, Kathy.

McCain is a liberal. The obamination is a Che-style communist and HiLIARy is a socialist.

What is the difference between a communist and a socialist?

[Maggie_T]

These days? Not much. Marxists have taken to calling themselves 'socialists' because they think it sounds better and people will go "Well, a socialist is not as bad as a communist. And they care for the poor."

Judging by the amount of fools who fall for that canard, I'd say it's working well for Marxists.

Me? I think they're same turd with a different stench (pardon my less-than-ladylike comparison).

[Maggie_T]

Actually, a liar is someone who intends to tell lies. Someone who thinks that their conservative and is stating their opinion is not a liar. I honestly do believe McCain thinks he's conserative because blah, blah, blah ...

Whatever rocks your boat, dearie.

And spare me the dictionary quotes. I have one, too.

Don't get me wrong, Teen. I like you and you posted some good posts. But sometimes your youth shows very clearly. Take it as a compliment.

[EveningStar]

What is the difference between a communist and a socialist?
I'm not a political scholar, so this is oversimplifying it considerably.

A socialist believes that everything should be owned by the government and everyone should work for the government.

A communist is a socialist who carries this one step further and says that everyone, regardless of his station in life, should have "the same amount of stuff."

Needless to say, there is no pure socialism or communism in existence.

[TeenageRepublican]

Whatever rocks your boat, dearie.

And spare me the dictionary quotes. I have one, too.

Don't get me wrong, Teen. I like you and you posted some good posts. But sometimes your youth shows very clearly. Take it as a compliment.

I will. I like you too Maggie. You're the only woman I know that's more politically incorrect than me...

[Maggie_T]

:lol:

Stick around, kid. I still have a lot to teach you. :evilgrin:

[TeenageRepublican]

Well, most girls I've dated have smacked me if I ever cursed. I got smacked for saying "What the hell..." while watching Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (it was screaming "What the hell," trust me) on a date. So yeah, I don't expect women to curse, especially after that expierence...

[Kathekon]

It may be equally indefensibly stupid to assume that the (R) behind McVains name means he would support any worthwhile Judges or do anything to slow the slide of this country into a Socialist cess pool ...

I am still waiting for McCain to make any stands that are supported by his past actions (not just election year rhetoric) ....:confused:

I do not argue there are any guarantees. It seems like the choice is either 50%-plus of what I would like to see (McCain) versus zero percent chance of what I would like to see (Obama/Clinton).

There is also no guarantee that the GOP will regroup morally and ideologically when so many senior GOP Senators and Reps are pork-addicted and running scared.

I am just looking for the least damage in the short run and the best posture from which to regain focus and regain congress.

[Maggie_T]

Well, most girls I've dated have smacked me if I ever cursed. I got smacked for saying "What the hell..." while watching Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (it was screaming "What the hell," trust me) on a date. So yeah, I don't expect women to curse, especially after that expierence...


I won't slap you for cursing, Teen. I should, but I won't. Especially if your curses are directed to liberals.

[TeenageRepublican]

What did she expect? It's a movie about a teenage boy with glasses waving a magical stick around with his buddies. I swear, half the characters in that will turn out to be homosexual by the last movie...

[Maggie_T]

:lol:

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I am just looking for the least damage in the short run and the best posture from which to regain focus and regain congress.

Well, I guess that depends upon your definition of "least damage in the short run."

When has a Conservative President/Congress ever netted us a Conservative gain? We had the BEST POSSIBLE CHANCE of regaining the Conservative foothold in this country when Ronald Reagan took office ... did we achieve it? No, we got a one term liberal lite which in turn led to Clinton. It took a two-term democrat (Clinton) to achieve a Republican majority that turned out to be a dud, full of RINO's with nary a whiff of the Reagan legacy left. With that "majority" we got ANOTHER two-termer, a liberal-lite in Conservative Republican clothing and LOST the footing in Congress completely! And NOW I'm being asked to vote in yet ANOTHER liberal-lite who doesn't even pretend to wear the Conservative Republican clothing and BELIEVE that will GAIN us a Conservative foothold once again? We (collectively as a Conservatives Republican group) squandered it the first two times, what makes anyone think the third time's the charm? (Both of those questions are rhetorical, aimed at no one here at FC.)

:shake: Sorry, SCOTUS appointments just aren't enough for me. I have no doubt in my mind the only difference will be, we'll get stealth appointments, and the bad pennies (bad appointments) will turn up heads at the worst possible moment.

[Lubbock]

I'm through with McCain.

I've reasoned with myself, cajoled myself, bargained with myself, and lied to myself, in an effort to get past my gag limit, but with the North Carolina Ad put down, and the Blame GWB for Katrina mouthing off, McCain finished me off.

My Texas vote probably won't be a factor anyway, but I can tell you this: If my ONE VOTE would tip the scales between McCain and either of the Dems, the the Dem would get it, because I won't cast a vote for McCain.

I did it in the Texas Primary [that was back to my lying to myself era], but Never Again.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Better?
Yep. Thanks.

[gnome]

I'm through with McCain.

I've reasoned with myself, cajoled myself, bargained with myself, and lied to myself,

Well, there's your problem, you didn't try bribery :D

Something is very wrong with our system for selecting candidates. I'm sure the overwhelming majority of voters is highly dissatisfied with the choices available to them.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I'm sure the overwhelming majority of voters is highly dissatisfied with the choices available to them.


There is one choice left .... None Of The Above.

Truly, what would happen if there was SUCH a low voter turnout, would a President still be seated even though only a handful (perspectively speaking) of people voted?

[BuckeyeMike]

If there were an actual "None of the above" available on the ballots, and that "None of the above" carried with it a signifigance that should a proscribed percentage of the voters elect to mark their ballots as such, and the "None of the above" vote is larger than any candidate's then there would have to be a "do over", these candidates are disqualified or something, and the sitting office holder would remain in that position until such time as viable candidates could be found and duly elected. Of course this would NEVER come to be because today's pols would never let it happen, and, I'm fairly certain, today's SCOTUS would find reason to ban it. If they couldn't find a viable reason, I'm again fairly certain they, in their infinite wisdom would make one up. Pie in the sky, I know, but I'd sure like to see it happen.
"None of the Above"..........the true "third party"!

edit: A "third party" that wouldn't have to spend a plug nickle "campaigning"!

[gnome]

Actually if I were the sitting president I'd jump on the option... because I don't think our system is capable of generating candidates that wouldn't lose to "none of the above"... so I'd get to be President for life!

[BuckeyeMike]

Therein lies the beauty of it all.......they (Reps & Dems) would be forced to field candidates that are more mainstream with the American public. Candidates that are to the legal American Citizen's liking, not the special interests, the Soros assholes, the environazis, foreign countries, big business........

[Elgalad]

I'ma head on down to the City Hall tomorrow and change my name to Noneofthe Above.

:evilgrin:

We'll just see how that goes..


-Elgalad

[Timberwolf]

Samack Yomama is a socialist and a clueless bigot (judging by the company he keeps).
Hitlery is a Marxist, who wants to impose HER will on all of our lives.
McVain is a Fascist who claims to be a Republican.

Pick yer poison...I'm not gonna vote fer any of 'em...the ONLY way I'll vote for the Vain One is if he selects hisself a VERY conservative running mate (such as Tancredo or Hunter).

[Naturalized-Texan]

TW: Actually, Hitlery and Obama are the fascists, not McCain.

[BuckeyeMike]

I'ma head on down to the City Hall tomorrow and change my name to Noneofthe Above.

:evilgrin:

We'll just see how that goes..


-Elgalad

Ya sure as hell got my vote!:noggin:

[Timberwolf]

TW: Actually, Hitlery and Obama are the fascists, not McCain.
<dl><dt class="hwrd">Main Entry:</dt><dd class="hwrd">fas·cism http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?fascis01.wav=fascism'))</dd><dt class="pron">Pronunciation:</dt><dd class="pron"> \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\ </dd><dt class="func">Function:</dt><dd class="func">noun </dd><dt class="ety">Etymology:</dt><dd class="ety">Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces</dd><dt class="date">Date:</dt><dd class="date">1921</dd></dl> 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge>

I guess you're right...he only wants forcible suppression of those who are supposedly his political ALLIES.

Quite honestly, they are ALL power-hungry socialists. The ONLY way I'm voting for McCain is if his Veep is quite conservative (and has the track record to prove it).

[Lazarus]

And your point ?
McCain has done NOTHING to show me that he'd appoint anyone worthwhile ...

The Senate and House is where we need to focus since the RINO Party has tried to pass off a full fledge Anti-Conservative as a conservative ...Precisely!!!! Well said Bro!

I keep hearing all about how McCain is going to make the court a Conservative court, and yet I see absolutely NO evidence to support this claim, when reviewing McCain's career of screwing Conservative policies... This SCOTUS argument for McCain, as far as I can see, is just a pop culture rumor started by wishful thinking that has just been passed hand to hand by people who are desperate to find some redeeming virtue in Jihn McCain...

I certainly HOPE President McCain will appoint conservative Justices when the opportunity offers itself, but everything that McCain has indicated is that he intends to "reach across" to his collegues on the Left - And NOTHING in that policy implies that we'llget anything but liberal Justices for the SCOTUS...

[Not_A_Libscum]

There is no argumenrt that Juan McCain is more acceptable than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. There will be plenty of folks that will vote for Juan - I won't be one of them.

[Maggie_T]

Welcome, Not A Libscum! :wave: I like your name. You'll fit right in.

And, BTW, I won't vote for McCain, either.

[THEBIRD]

I will not reward a moderate with my vote for being a moderate. That will only make things worse as it will reinforce the idea that reaching out to the left is the way to get elected.

NEVER. I will NEVER vote for John McCain for any reason.

Its time to tighten the choke collar and yank hard to send the GOP a message that only conservatives are electable.

Right now my vote will go to either the Constitution party or Libertarian party.

[Nutrider99]

Right now my vote will go to either the Constitution party or Libertarian party.
In other words, into the dumpster.

The primary process is still going on. Have you voted for your CONSERVATIVE candidate yet? The only chance we have is to elect conservatives to both branches of Congress to fight whatever the liberals try and do to this country. Maybe McVain will do us a favor and nominate a conservative VP. Then all we have to do is feed him pork rinds three times a day!!

[gnome]

Interestingly, some callers to Rush's show today objected to Operation Chaos on the grounds that switching registrations to support Hillary (and thus continue the primary battle) would keep them from choosing among Republicans in their local primaries.

[Neil Peart]

Interestingly, some callers to Rush's show today objected to Operation Chaos on the grounds that switching registrations to support Hillary (and thus continue the primary battle) would keep them from choosing among Republicans in their local primaries.That's why I decided not to participate in Operation Chaos today.

IMO, Operation Chaos is more about Rush intentionally pissing off leftists than actually getting people to be involved in it. I love it! :thumb:

[Naturalized-Texan]

IMO, Operation Chaos is more about Rush intentionally pissing off leftists than actually getting people to be involved in it. I love it! :thumb:
He's having a ball and so am I. :rotflmbo:

[DesertFox]

Yeah, but it's so unfair. Rush should have both hands tied behind his back. :D

[roguemerc]

Well, most girls I've dated have smacked me if I ever cursed. I got smacked for saying "What the hell..." while watching Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (it was screaming "What the hell," trust me) on a date. So yeah, I don't expect women to curse, especially after that expierence...

Sounds like you date a bunch of prudes. No offense. I'd move on to other territory.