611768e3717a0fd48dd7…

…

Bookmark to:

Hide Sites

……

cheers.

fogw on January 28, 2008 at 3:51 PM

Then we will agree to disagree fogw. Please send my regards to your son. I thank him for his service and you for your sacrifice. I will pray for him as I do all the troops and their families.

one cycle = one four year term as president

You’re saying, it’s acceptable to you to have Hillary or Obama as our Commander in Chief for four years. And by making that choice, you’re banking on a 100% true conservative coming forward to run in the next cycle because the Republicans were somehow taught a lesson. Wow!

Sorry, we’ll just have to disagree I guess. My reason for getting out to vote, even for a republican whose politics I despise, is far different than yours. I have a son in the service, currently back home for a stretch, and since he told me he doesn’t want Hillary or Obama as his commander I will do all I can to make sure those cowards are not at the helm. For his sake ….. and every other soldier with boots on the ground.

cheers.

We are probably a little less screwed if Romney gets the nomination, but that’s nothing I’d stand up and cheer for.

The one small hope I have is that none of these bozos get a clear lead, that there is a brokered GOP convention and someone decent gets drafted…. And that is as unlikely as me winning Powerball (I don’t play the lottery).

Throw that into your wait and see equation.

fogw on January 28, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Sorry Fogw, bad wording,let me clarify. By lost elections, I mean Repubs running for election/re-election, in 08. Not years & years of election cylcles.

kcd on January 28, 2008 at 1:49 PM

Maybe huh? After we have lost several elections? That’s one hell of a strategy. Let’s hope things get better if we don’t vote.

If the Dems win “several elections” while you’re waiting for Republicans to come to their senses, you may find yourself staring at nuclear fireballs, courtesy of OBL and friends.

While you’re waiting for your Utopia, the Dems will put us all in grave danger. They cower to the terrorists.

Throw that into your wait and see equation.

You just blew my mind.

fogw on January 28, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Fogw, If we refrain from voting for the “hold our noses and vote” RINO’s, then maybe, just maybe, the Repubs will get the message after they have lost several elections. We want a conservative, NOT a rino!

The only way I forsee getting a candidate that we don’t have to hold our noses to vote for is to not vote for those we do. Even if that means an even worse candidate getting elected.

Hollowpoint on January 28, 2008 at 1:34 PM

I understood every word of your statement Hollowpoint. I agree.

The only way I forsee getting a candidate that we don’t have to hold our noses to vote for is to not vote for those we do. Even if that means an even worse candidate getting elected.

Hollowpoint on January 28, 2008 at 1:34 PM

You just blew my mind.

Not voting for the “lesser of two evils” will leave you with the “greater of two evils” in the White House. And extra bonus … you’ll still have a lousy politician in office.

Because they all are.

fogw on January 28, 2008 at 12:52 PM

The only way I forsee getting a candidate that we don’t have to hold our noses to vote for is to not vote for those we do. Even if that means an even worse candidate getting elected.

There’s no incentive for the worst of our elected officials to change their ways so long as we keep voting them in no matter what they do.

Sorry Jaibones. I think that is why we are in a position to have to vote for a rino like McCain. Conservatives keep settling and settling and settling…before long we will be as liberal as the rest of them. I really hate to say this but McCain will be no better than Hillary or Obama and our country will suffer just as much. It will kill the Rebub party. I’d rather be able to “blame” liberals for our sorry state of affairs, than a “republican”. Sad isn’t it?

kcd on January 28, 2008 at 12:26 PM

Therein lies the rub, particularly with McVain (and Huckabee as well, but he’s starting to fade).

You compromise on one thing … and then another … and then another … and another … and another … and pretty soon, you’ve compromised every one of your important principles away. To support McVain, you either have to compromise away almost all of your conservative principles, or somehow believe that he’ll respect them against strong evidence to the contrary.

Want strict constructionists on the court? You have to believe that his record on Gang of 14, his comments about “drawing the line” with Alito for “wearing his conservatism on his sleeve”, and his clear disdain for the 1st Amendment as evidenced by McVain-Feingold won’t affect his decision making in nominating judges, or you have to compromise on the principle of preventing judicial activism.

Strong national defense? Oh sure, this is supposed to be McVain’s strong suit. But you have to overlook his willingness to shut down Gitmo, his unwillingness to use harsh interrogation methods even during a ticking time bomb scenario, and his demonstrated unwillingness to secure our borders … or compromise on those principles.

And on those borders? You really have to buy into his BS that he’s heard us and understands now that securing the border comes first, despite strong evidence to the contrary, much of it very recent (i.e. his hiring of Hernandez and Perenchio [Pinnochio?], his statement that, as president, he would have signed the McVain-Kennedy amnesty bill, etc.). You have to put aside any principles of respecting the rule of law and of fair play in the immigration process for people from other countries that don’t share a border with the U.S. … or you have to be gullible enough to believe he will actually do something about it.

Think he’s good on taxes? You have to forget that at the time he opposed Bush’s tax cuts, it was on the class-warfare grounds that “the rich don’t need a tax cut”. And you have to overlook his current proposal with Lieberman that will add an average of $1000 tax burden to each family in the U.S. Or, if you don’t want to overlook those things, you can compromise and just go along with the idea that keeping taxes low is no longer important.

And on McVain-Lieberman? You have to overlook that he’s bought into Gore-bal warming, hook, line, and sinker … or believe that basing such policy on sound scientific principles is no longer important?

Oppose abortion? You have to overlook his position in FEC vs. Wisconsin Right-to-Life, not to mention his squishiness on the issue of judicial appointments.

The list goes on and on. To vote for McVain, you either need to suspend belief, or compromise an overwhelming majority long-standing conservative principles. While none of the candidates we fielded this year was ever perfect, the problem with McVain is that his is just so damned imperfect.

He’s too flawed on too many issues of fundamental importance to the conservative movement, so much to the point that I just can’t bring myself to vote for him against anybody the democrats will field, even Hillary. He’s that bad.

What a remarkable lack of judgment this man possesses. Maybe that’s a problem…

Jaibones on January 28, 2008 at 10:41 AM

But he knows better than you and I. He’s the Maverick!

The conservative cabal has settled on McCain – Bush/RNC/Crist/Martinez/soon Giuliani/etc., etc.

It’s payback for McCain’s Gargantuan efforts to help Bush get re-elected in 2004.

you’ll still have a lousy politician in office.

Because they all are.

fogw on January 28, 2008 at 12:52 PM

Crooks all, just for running. There’s a saying about that but I don’t have time to look for it. I agree with your sentiments fogw, but I repeat myself :)

That’s a legitimate view, but in mine, voting for the “lesser of two evils” no matter who the candidate is has gotten us the lousy politicians we have and keep re-electing now.

Hollowpoint on January 28, 2008 at 12:07 PM

Follow your premise through to the end.

Not voting for the “lesser of two evils” will leave you with the “greater of two evils” in the White House. And extra bonus … you’ll still have a lousy politician in office.

Because they all are.

There are soldier in Iraq, Afghanistan and stationed around the world, fighting, when necessary, so that you may have THE RIGHT TO VOTE. If you do not exercise your right to vote, you might as well dress in Code Pink.

Hell, start a write in campaign for anyone that you choose, but don’t sit on you a$$ and do nothing. The least you can do is VOTE!!

I may have mentioned in another thread that my parents voted absentee in CA for Maverick. Well, my dad is now experiencing “voters remorse” and said he wishes he had waited.

Key take-away… if you’re on the fence, don’t vote absentee.

CliffHanger on January 28, 2008 at 12:26 PM

Good anecdote, Cliffhanger. I doubt your parents are the first, and they certainly won’t be the last.

I may have mentioned in another thread that my parents voted absentee in CA for Maverick. Well, my dad is now experiencing “voters remorse” and said he wishes he had waited.

Hopefully Mitt will get the nod & your parents can make up for it in the general!

thirteen28 on January 28, 2008 at 12:19 PM

I may have mentioned in another thread that my parents voted absentee in CA for Maverick. Well, my dad is now experiencing “voters remorse” and said he wishes he had waited.

Key take-away… if you’re on the fence, don’t vote absentee.

And elect Hillary or Obambi. Sorry, no passive-aggressive positions are allowed. Either you’re with us or you’re against us, dude.

Jaibones on January 28, 2008 at 12:00 PM

Sorry Jaibones. I think that is why we are in a position to have to vote for a rino like McCain. Conservatives keep settling and settling and settling…before long we will be as liberal as the rest of them. I really hate to say this but McCain will be no better than Hillary or Obama and our country will suffer just as much. It will kill the Rebub party. I’d rather be able to “blame” liberals for our sorry state of affairs, than a “republican”. Sad isn’t it?