That said, we *must* consider the alternatives. Obama & Clinton are singing the same chorus about pulling troops out of Iraq before the job is done. I know Clinton’s been strong on the war in the past, but now she’s playing true-to-form & basing her decision on the basis of Democrat polls.

The lives of American troops are at stake. Is casting a vote of conscience for a 3rd party candidate (who’d be sure to lose) worth the loss of American blood because of the carnage that would accompany the current Democrat war strategy?

Tim

So, Tim. We agree and disagree.

funky chicken has actually called me correctly; except it isn’t “lives”, just the war in Iraq. Being a bit dishonest there for shock value, but generally accurate.

If you come to me today and give me the following choice, I know how I’d make it.

Presume an evil Genie give you the following two choices for the world; and you must pick one.

1) Pull the troops out of Iraq.

2) Elect a President with no respect for the Constitution who will also immediately remove the Fist Amendment.

America can lose the war in Iraq and survive. I’m not as convinced that America can lose personal freedoms and survive.

So, I have to choose the “lesser of two evils”? Fine, but that ain’t McCain.

I’d like to have a candidate who would finish the win in Iraq, and protect Constitutional rights. I really would love that option. But it isn’t on the table anymore.

For some reason a majority of Republicans voting in the Primary have opted to give me the above choice. I’ll admit I feel sick about both options, but I’ve not seen anything that will switch my opinion of the “lesser evil” so far.

This is the first time in my life the Republicans have actually run the “worst” candidate; not just crappy, but worst.

If I’m wrong, how much of the Constitution are you willing to flush forever to save Iraq? How willing are you to have a precedent on the books for flushing more of the Constitution in the future to save Iraq? Oh, and what will America look like in 50 years if we set a precedent now of ignoring individual freedoms as a nation?

Now, funky chicken doesn’t give a damn about the Constitution if we can hold out on the War in Iraq. Somehow I think that’s a bit shortsighted; but he feels that the current war footing of America is more important than what America is. He’d let us be Nazi Germany tomorrow if we could simply win wars. (See, I can do over the top, exaggerations for shock value too)

We’re damned well going to lose something in the next few years. Either the War in Iraq, or the First Amendment of the Constitution (and a path to losing the rest of it).

I’m sorry we’re on different sides here, but losing Vietnam didn’t permanently cripple the nation (yes, it had a lasting effect, but it’s ebbing). However the New Deal, and it’s view of the Commerce Clause has made a considerably more huge difference in the scope and actions of the Federal Government, and where we are as a nation. And that change and the loss of the Constitutional rights that went with it haven’t subsided, but have increased.

So yes funky chicken, I believe that politics is more important than the war in Iraq (not quite what you said, but close).

You can disagree if you want, but I think keeping America as the “land of the free, home of the brave” is important.

gekkobear on February 9, 2008 at 9:54 PM