Bob Barr to put Georgia, North Carolina in play for Obama?
posted at 9:01 pm on June 4, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
All part of his daring master plan to make his name as widely reviled among the right as Ralph Nader’s is among the left.
Polls in Georgia and North Carolina over the last two weeks show Mr. Barr winning 8 percent and 6 percent respectively of the presidential vote, and in both cases helping keep likely Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama within striking distance of Mr. McCain in those states — which, taken together, account for more electoral votes than Florida, Pennsylvania or Ohio…
[InsiderAdvantage pollster Matt] Towery said North Carolina and Georgia are exactly the places that Mr. Barr could put in play: both have high African-American populations that Mr. Obama can tap to boost his turnout numbers, and have conservative-leaning voters whose dissatisfaction with President Bush could lead them to a third-party candidate.
The Georgia poll, taken just before Mr. Barr secured the Libertarian nomination, gave Mr. McCain 45 percent support, Mr. Obama 35 percent and Mr. Barr 8 percent. In North Carolina a Public Policy Polling survey released Monday found Mr. McCain at 43 percent, Mr. Obama at 40 percent and Mr. Barr at 6 percent. The poll’s authors said Mr. Barr’s support appeared to come particularly from independents who previously had broken for Mr. McCain.
I can understand a third-party run if, like Perot, you command a minority so sizable — 20 or 25 percent, say — that the party simply has to address some of its concerns, if not in this election then in the next. A five percent minority doesn’t do that. You can make up that amount elsewhere by doing a better job of mobilizing your base or pandering a bit to other constituencies at the margins. If you’re going to strike at the establishment, in other words, you’d better do it hard enough that the reaction is fear, not anger. How do you think libertarians will be received if this tool hands us President Obama? Exit question: On which issues, precisely, do Barr and Ron Paul propose to compromise with the 95% of Republicans who aren’t voting for them? They’re each trying to bring the GOP around to more libertarian positions, Barr by spoiling McCain’s chances and Paul by trying to work within the party for now and land a role at the convention. Surely they understand that there’ll be some give and take involved in reaching an accommodation with more centrist/hawkish conservatives. Yet Paul’s philosophy, in which every last position is presented as the one and only acceptable constitutional solution, makes that impossible. You have to do exactly what he wants, because that’s what the Constitution wants and there can be no compromise where the supreme law of the land is concerned. So how does this play out? If the GOP decides, sure, let’s give the gold standard a second look, what does America’s Greatest Patriot give back?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »
Out: Would you trust Bill Clinton with your young daughter?
In: Would you trust John McCain with your Republican party?
MB4 on June 5, 2008 at 12:16 AM
Would you trust Obama with your country?
Call me crazy, but I value country above either daughter or party.
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 12:18 AM
One man’s Taco is another man’s Big Mac.
MB4 on June 5, 2008 at 12:20 AM
I ain’t votin’ for NoWhereMan. Ain’t votin’ for the crazy old amnesty coot either.
MB4 on June 5, 2008 at 12:23 AM
What will become of you when this does not happen?
Is it possible for you to make a transition to living in the real world?
EJDolbow on June 5, 2008 at 12:28 AM
You must not have a daughter I’m guessing..
SaintOlaf on June 5, 2008 at 12:29 AM
Myself, I read nothing except the criminal news and the agony column. The latter is always instructive.
Holmes on June 5, 2008 at 12:36 AM
Thank you for posting that.
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 12:39 AM
Nope. He’s in CA, I’m in NC. We both base our worldview on the truth of the Bible, but we have very different styles. Start here and read down.
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 12:44 AM
What part of the Bible suggests people be lead by an unqualified, petty, foul mouthed, mean spirited little man?
EJDolbow on June 5, 2008 at 12:48 AM
I never said the Bible suggests we be lead by John McCain.
;-)
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 12:50 AM
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 12:54 AM
You do a great disservice to those who have sent their daughters to serve in Iraq and Afganistan, not to mention the two world wars, etc…
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 1:01 AM
Actually, Start here and read down.
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 1:02 AM
G’night.
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 1:06 AM
wow
funky chicken on June 5, 2008 at 1:10 AM
Like I said before. Maybe the ladies won’t vote McCain, but they are not going to swim a lake of sewage and crawl over broken glass to vote for Obama either.
Sekhmet on June 5, 2008 at 1:16 AM
Quite frankly, I think our McCain haters ar more than welcome to vote for Bob Barr or stay home. Maybe they can make an appointment to get their nails done on Election Day with the ticked-off Hillary voters.
Sekhmet on June 5, 2008 at 1:25 AM
I just love it how well intentioned disagreements with McCain’s positions that are DEAL BREAKERS gets boiled down to the simplistic ‘McCain haters’ comments.
No matter how many objections anyone could put up as reasons to not vote for McCain, it will still be merely ‘McCain hatred’. I have nothing against McCain. It’s just that if his positions were taken by Hillary Clinton (which many of them are) you would all point to it as yet another reason to ‘hate’ Hillary Clinton.
At no point have I said that I ‘hate’ McCain. Every post I have offered included concrete disagreements with his positions that Republicans used to have problems with.
However, I do see a lot of Bob Barr hatred. . . and Barack Obamanoia.
ThackerAgency on June 5, 2008 at 1:39 AM
If McCain loses, it’s his own fault and only HE is to blame. HE chose the path of pandering to moderates, democrats, liberals, hispanics, global warming activists, etc.. HE chose the path of massively increasing the size of government with cap/trade.
McCain hopes that ONE issue (foreign policy) will keep conservatives on his side. He’s banking on “Republicans” to be 1-issue voters, like a lot of “anyone but Obama” dummies on HA. If he was wrong on that, then it is his fault only.
Stop blaming everyone else except McCain.
nottakingsides on June 5, 2008 at 1:41 AM
When you have to call those with whom you disagree “haters” you have lost the debate and not graciously either.
MB4 on June 5, 2008 at 2:11 AM
Forget about Bob Barr. He is Mccain lite.
There is only ONE candidate out there for conservatives to vote for!
There is a candidate who opposes amnesty for illegals.
Chuck Baldwin 2008
http://baldwin2008.com/
SaintOlaf on June 5, 2008 at 2:21 AM
I’m voting for Barr.
It’s break the two party system or civil war for me.
noblejones on June 5, 2008 at 2:27 AM
Forget Barr..
Us Christians are mulling over whether or not to go constitution party right now…if we do, we are the only third party that could actually win!
Listen up Conservatives and anyone opposed to amnesty:
Barr is pro amnesty.
Chuck Baldwin is THE ONLY anti amnesty candidate!
Baldwin’s constitution party platform:
* pro life/supports Human life ammendment
* opposed to gay marriage
* opposes amnesty for illegals
* Drop out of U.N.
* Repeal NAFTA/CAFTA
* Protect second amendment rights
* Strong national defense, second to none
* Free market health care solutions/ eliminate FDA
* Repeal 16th amendment/eliminate income tax establish tariff based system
If Mccain screws us with the VP choice..Christian voters will go Constitution Party!
With Christians, conservatives and Ron Paul supporters supporting Chuck Baldwin…we could actually win this election!
Worst case we will take back the republican party.
http://baldwin2008.com/
SaintOlaf on June 5, 2008 at 3:06 AM
For the life of me I do not understand how people who call themselves Republicans can just thumb their noses at the will of their own party and help some Socialist like Obama win. Once again they are talking about supporting some loon like Barr who has not a snow ball’s chance in winning, because golly gee, the whole anmensty thing is a deal breaker so we will help Obama win rather than sully ourselves by voting for McCain. What a bunch of dimwitted selfish hypocrites.
There is nothing noble in that, it is just stupid.
Terrye on June 5, 2008 at 7:12 AM
SECOND LOOK AT COMA-INDUCING NARCOTICS!
wccawa on June 5, 2008 at 7:33 AM
He’s just PaulNut II. You didn’t even read anything on his website outside of immigration, did you?
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 7:40 AM
Just in case anybody is actually falling for SaintOlaf’s lies about a certain PaulNut loving 3rd party candidate, I ask you to check this out.
SaintOlaf says:
Chuck Baldwin says:
I would say that this kind of talk is dangerous, but it’s obvious that Chuck doesn’t even come close to understanding the issue. Good luck voting for that nut, SaintOlaf. I’d probably have a little respect for you if he was an actual conservative. At least you’d be voting on principle. A vote for this guy is just another pro-Obama protest vote.
malan89 on June 5, 2008 at 7:47 AM
Chuck Baldwin? Gimmee a break. The guy has never even been elected Dog Catcher.
Bob Barr is a former 4-term United States Congressman. He’s a former CIA Intelligence Officer.
Baldwin’s claim to fame is… Well, just what is it?
ericdondero on June 5, 2008 at 8:03 AM
Oh, and Chuck Baldwin’s Constitution Party? On the ballot in maybe 35 states if they’re lucky.
Libertarian Party?
49. Possibly all 50, District of Columbia and Guam.
ericdondero on June 5, 2008 at 8:04 AM
“Quite frankly, I think our McCain haters ar more than welcome to vote for Bob Barr or stay home.” -Sekhmet
McCain haters? This blog really HAS turned into the Kos of the right.
Please…stop acting like a spoiled little liberal.
Al-Ozarka on June 5, 2008 at 8:20 AM
That idiot Barr needs to take his warped ego and his ridiculous campaign and get the hell out of the way. The narcissistic bum cares about nothing but himself and is wasting our time.
rplat on June 5, 2008 at 8:23 AM
Uh, thats just it, many of us do not call ourselves Republicans.
I’m a conservative… and the Republican Party is no longer Conservative. I’m registered independent, just like a bit over 1/3 of the electorate is…
I will not vote out of Party loyalty for a party that does NOT represent my views.
If you’ll notice, there is NOTHING in the Constitution about Political parties… and yet the two major parties have a lock on power.
If it aint workin, then its time to fix it.
Romeo13 on June 5, 2008 at 8:24 AM
A couple of thoughts on the post:
Unless I missed a little sarcasm, Paul is not trying to work within the party. Working within the party means building coalitions in the party and winning the infrastructure over with superior arguments, two things that Paul has historically shown zero talent in doing. Instead Paul thought he could win by bringing in his own supporters to, for lack of a better term, hijack the party.
As for Barr, I think a major party of the Libertarian calculus recognizes that they have no chance with Barr but are willing to throw the election to Obama anyway. This is based on the theory that after four years of Obama, America will wake up and see how dumb the Democratic platform is and will make a huge shift to the right. However, if that were the case then Obama wouldn’t be a serious candidate after the lesson we learned with Carter.
Or, as a former DI once told me…you do not win by losing.
I have issues with McCain but I at least believe he’ll be a competent President. I cannot say the same for Barr or Obama. The latter have a fundamental misunderstanding of the world.
JohnTant on June 5, 2008 at 8:30 AM
McCain/Barr 08
bridgetown on June 5, 2008 at 8:36 AM
John McCain is putting these states in play for Obama along with every other state in the union by leaving out people like me (Conservatives). Ok, John let’s see how your strategy of trying to be a better liberal than Barack works out for you? You will do it without me!
sabbott on June 5, 2008 at 8:48 AM
It’s no longer about “The Party”! “The Party” has stopped being conservative and has started being part of the problem! We conservatives have a set of core principles which the Republican Party no longer believes in. Limited government, low taxes, secured borders, our nation first etc. The current Republican Party has become the party of Washington more interested in the approval of Tim Russert, Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews rather than the American People. Unless and until they return to conservative principles, people like me shall remain Independents! We will no longer support liberal policies which are destroying this country and keeping these guys in power!
sabbott on June 5, 2008 at 8:53 AM
It really doesn’t matter what Barr does. This party deserves to lose for nominating McCain. It’s what we need to happen in order to get it through some people’s skulls that we are not sticking with our principles anymore. McCain is simply a Democrat-light.
Vaporman87 on June 5, 2008 at 9:03 AM
For all you guys who have drunk the Kool-Aid, I want to say this only once…….
Not voting for McCain is NOT voting for Obama. If John McCain wants MY vote, he needs to earn it. I have no intention of falling into your false reasoning that McCain is better than alternatives. He is not.
John McCain and Obama are virtually identical on all domestic issues and the big difference is over Iraq. That isn’t enough to be a mindless McCain supporter when it is clear that McCain doesn’t respect my postion on most issues.
So, before you mindless drones tell me to “shut the f**k up and vote for McCain” please give me reasons to vote for McCain instead of reasons to vote against Obama. If you can’t do that easily, then John McCain probably isn’t the candidate you claim he is!
highhopes on June 5, 2008 at 9:11 AM
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 9:15 AM
The fact that anybody who disagrees with McCain is labeled a “hater” only goes to prove that McCain and his mindless drones don’t respect the conservative wing of the GOP. I will NOT “shut the f**k up” as you idiots are demanding.
highhopes on June 5, 2008 at 9:16 AM
Baldwin is a complete lunatic and nutcase like Paul, Barr isn’t far behind them on that road. hopefully he’s just pandering to the looney’s in the LP but not that it matters since he has zero chance of beign elected and his sole purpose is to get Obama elected and the advancement of Socialism in this country. McCain is a 4 year buffer atleast, and not an idiot on National Defense
jp on June 5, 2008 at 9:19 AM
Aren’t conservatives and their relationship to the Republicans just the reverse of blacks and their relationship to the Democrats? Maybe they’re each roughly 30% of their party, and their party can’t win without them, but by the same token, they’re residents on the plantation–push too far and you get a “Sistah Souljah” moment.
McCain isn’t adept at massaging the feelings of conservatives. He may even be downright opposed to doing so. And I agree with you that his feet should be held to the fire every day. But like the black vote, in the end, where are most people gonna go?
JiangxiDad on June 5, 2008 at 9:23 AM
There are a lot of people in this country who feel like highhopes feels. I repeat the words of wisdom that I shared yesterday:
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 9:24 AM
Only possible because McShamnesty is no “conservative” standard bearer…
LOL too funny.
TOPV on June 5, 2008 at 9:30 AM
DITTO!!!
TOPV on June 5, 2008 at 9:32 AM
by the time the election rolls around McCain will have ticked off so many conservatives of every stripe that Obambi will win with a simple 50 million votes. Watch for the lowest turnout evah!!!!!!!!!!!
oldvannes on June 5, 2008 at 9:34 AM
This clown looks like an old porn star and is about as bright.
Wade on June 5, 2008 at 9:43 AM
You’re both profoundly wrong, but I hope you’re not insane. McCain is not ideologically conservative, no. He is in agreement with conservatives on the enormous majority of important governance issues. If you fail to understand this, then you are unqualified to vote intelligently.
Or maybe you are just stupid. Most likely, you are too emotional about the issues that you disagree with him on to think clearly about the election. Any chance you’ll get smarter by November?
Jaibones on June 5, 2008 at 9:54 AM
Some of you act as if McCain didn’t win the nomination.
There were votes cast for that, ya know.
bridgetown on June 5, 2008 at 9:58 AM
revenge of the Bible twins.
ooffaahh.
redrock on June 5, 2008 at 9:59 AM
Classic
But no it was a conspiracy of Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney working to out the Huckster.
Who was the Mastermind I wonder, The Tri-Lateral Commission?
The UN? The Jooooooooos?
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 10:04 AM
There ya go
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Off your meds, I see.
Now, for Barr. I doubt he’ll pull that many votes. He’s done 180s on most of the issues people elected him down there for in the first place, and the LP is now warring over the nomination. Barr’s no Nader, or Perot.
rightwingprof on June 5, 2008 at 10:08 AM
Moses?
OldEnglish on June 5, 2008 at 10:08 AM
I have said on this forum many times and I will say it again - I WILL NOT VOTE FOR JOHN MCCAIN. He has not earned my vote and most definitely neither has the Republican party. Me and people like me, who will vote for Barr or not vote are not the problem - the Republican Party and their contemptible actions over the past ten years are to blame. I am not a McCain hater - it is the Republican Party who are conservative haters. The Republican Party is not a party of ideas, it is a political party whose only goal seems to be to win elections.
Blaming people who will no longer take the abuse of the Republican Party for Obama winning the presidency is akin to blaming Monica Lewinsky for ruining Clinton’s presidency. And AP has the sizable stones to try to cast blame on someone who trys to run against the corrupt and contemptible two party crap-fest that we have now? Thank goodness that AP was not a newspaper writer back in the late 1700’s. I can just see his headlines - “REVOLUTIONARY TOOLS REFUSE TO COMPROMISE WITH KING GEORGE!”
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 10:09 AM
The fact that he now toe taps with the ACLU will not make him more popular in this red state.
It’s all part of Barr’s “Terrorist Have Rights Too” campaign.
malan89 on June 4, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Enemy combatants will have Due Process, in American courts, on American soil??? ha ha ha What flavor of Kool-aid do you prefer???
DfDeportation on June 5, 2008 at 10:16 AM
I am glad you speak for all Christians, we Jews decided to forgo the convention this year and let everyone vote their conscience.
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 10:16 AM
SEC0ND L00K AT KING GE0RGE!!!!1!!
wccawa on June 5, 2008 at 10:17 AM
Indeed, a fraidy cat who killed a man and let his temper get the better of him so much that he was not allowed to enter Cannan…
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Nope, but the ones not apprehended on the battlefield need to be charged with something or released.
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 10:25 AM
While I admire anyone that will stand up for their convictions and not bow to the dumb masses, there’s a point beyond which you just look like a prizewinning tit.
Step up and claim your trophy, Bob.
LimeyGeek on June 5, 2008 at 10:26 AM
Not a bad analogy. Cranky old bastard just assumes that he’ll get the conservative vote so he takes it for granted just like the Dems assume that blacks are going to vote for whatever is nominated by that party.
Where I think the analogy breaks down somewhat is that social conservatives and evangelicals tend to vote on principle not party. They will go elsewhere if McCain strays too far in his pandering to the left (which I think he is doing). They’ll either sit this election out or, like I am inclined to do, vote for every conservative on the ballot and leave the Presidential block blank as a vote of no confidence in any of the candidates.
highhopes on June 5, 2008 at 10:30 AM
I lived in the Georgia 11th, and was happy to be represented by John Linder. When the district lines were redrawn, and Barr challenged Linder, I vaguely remember the Libertarians raising stink with Barr; it created a stir in the press because Linder didn’t denounce the Libertarian attacks against him. Ironic that a man the Libertarians hated only 6 years ago now becomes their candidate for POTUS.
ScaryBiscuits on June 5, 2008 at 10:35 AM
I guess I would rather be a prizewinning tit than a contributing member of the dumb masses.
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 10:36 AM
I will not vote for the better of the two evils again. If Obama wins this country deserves everything we get for electing him.
wrath187 on June 5, 2008 at 10:38 AM
TOPV is back after a hiatus, I see. She was the original “Lifelong Conservative Black Woman For Obama” here at hotair.
Support the unborn! Obama ‘08! LOL
funky chicken on June 5, 2008 at 10:48 AM
You’ve convinced me.
LimeyGeek on June 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM
You start with a correct observation:
Most dark skinned Americans (not “black” and not “African-American” unless they themselves are immigrants from Africa) vote Democrat, and most conservatives vote Republican.
But then you draw a very wrong conclusion:
Remember that slaves on plantations generally weren’t kept on the plantation by physical means (chains, fences, etc.). They were kept on the plantation by mental means (they were mentally enslaved). When Harriet Tubman would show up to free slaves, many of them refused to go with her and chose to stay on the plantation. They were too afraid of the unknown to leave their “comfort zone”. Even when Harriet would show up with previously-freed relatives of the current slaves, many of the current slaves were still too afraid to leave. They were mentally enslaved. It’s what The Matrix calls “a prison for your mind”.
Mason Weaver, a brilliant conservative who happens to have dark skin, wrote an excellent book entitled It’s OK to Leave the Plantation : The New Underground Railroad.
By the way, Mason and I are both examples of people who were very, very liberal until a major, life-changing event occurred in our life: accepting Jesus Christ as our LORD and Savior. That change is what changed both of us from liberals to conservatives. And that is why far-left liberals despise born-again evangelical Christians…we are the Harriet Tubman’s. We are the Morpheus’s. We are helping the Neo’s of this world to take the Red Pill, free their mind, and see the truth.
Now, there are many very deeply religious people in the community of dark skinned Americans who vote 90% Democrat. If we help them take the scales off their eyes and realize that voting for Obama means voting for a man who is willing to kill full-term babies in the name of abortion rights, a man who voted against Roberts and Alito in the name of abortion rights (because Roberts and Alito would likely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade), then those voters could be persuaded to vote for a man who honors God over a man who doesn’t.
Your conclusion is off base, because conservatives are not mental slaves to the Republican party, as Mike Huckabee duly noted:
Your second point:
McCain lost SC to Bush in 2000, and was so angry that he delivered his “Agents of Intolerance” speech in VA shortly thereafter. He said:
He then called George W. Bush “a Pat Robertson Republican” (i.e., “an agent of intolerance Republican”).
When challenged about what he said, John McCain said:
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, it is a fact that the Communist Party, USA, has a goal of “Defeating the Ultra-Right”
It certainly appears that John McCain wants to Defeat the Ultra-Right.
That doesn’t mean that Obama or Clinton would be any better. They would be just as bad or worse.
But “Agents of Intolerance” isn’t the only thing conservatives are upset with about John McCain. Here are some others:
If McCain continues to give conservatives the finger, it could be a painful November. He probably realizes that as much as he dislikes the “Agents of Intolerance”, he needs their support in order to win. That’s why he’s likely to pick Huckabee as his VP:
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Right on! I was thinking more along the lines of when he demanded to see the face of God, and when he threw a hissy fit and smashed the tablets after he found out that the people were ignoring him.
OldEnglish on June 5, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Yep! A vote for Barr is a vote against mamsy pamsy liberal RINOs.
Obama as president will be an immediate train wreck that we can recover from.
McCain will set the stage for the end of the U.S. as we know it.
I will make my stand with Barr.
TheSitRep on June 5, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Yes…yes…the Republican Party must be taught a lesson. The U.S.A. must be punished because they don’t think the way I want them to. Yessssssss….
I will not try to keep Obama from being elected…but if he is elected then it’s because Americans elected him and deserve him…even though..uh…I didn’t vote…um…to stop it…so I’m responsible for his election to…so I suppose that I deserve…uh…never mind.
What great logical heights we have reached at Hotair.
What’s really, really awesome is that if Obama gets elected these same people will spend all of their time here bitching and complaining about how he’s ruining the country.
I think we (I’ll call us “norms“) are just going to have to accept that there are a significant group of “conservatives” in America (I’ll call them “ME-o-cons“) who would rather sit up on their lofty peaks of self-righteousness and look down with distain on whatever transpires beneath (in a place I choose to refer to as “reality“) than actually attempt to change something, or in any way effect something for the better. Griping and complaining is much safer, easier, more fun and more soothing to the conscience than actually doing something to help.
They believe that America and the Republican Party must be “taught a lesson” for going against their wishes. The country must be punished, like an unruly child. And once they see that they were wrong, they’ll run home to mama. The best way to fix the Republican Party, they believe, is to abstain from it. Because, as we all know, the best way to change an organization is from the outside.
The me-o-cons wish to vent their spleen and nothing more. They have given up on the democratic process so the only thing left for them to do is to hover around the edges of it tossing in fiery darts. They have removed themselves from the political process but still hang out at a political blog. They have no answers, only “insights.”
Occasionally they will harken back to the golden age that was the Reagan presidency, but, truth be told, they would have called him a “liberal” too (probably “Renaldo Reagan” or “Ronald McAmnesty”).
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 11:19 AM
“Or maybe you are just stupid. Most likely, you are too emotional about the issues that you disagree with him on to think clearly about the election. Any chance you’ll get smarter by November?”
Jaibones on June 5, 2008 at 9:54 AM
Or maybe we are in this mess precisely because of voters like you, Jaibones, because voters like you don’t have the balls to stand up against the elitist schmucks running the GOP.
Our nation is doomed as long as we continue to allow those sound conserative ideals from the pass slip into history while proven failed liberal policies find their way into the mainstream.
Because voters like you continue to let it happen.
You ridicule others crying out for change when change is indeed what is needed.
Al-Ozarka on June 5, 2008 at 11:20 AM
How is silencing your own vote “crying out for change?”
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 11:23 AM
That just goes to show you that Moses was an average human being. Moses also spoke with a lisp and didn’t think he was the right man for the job God asked him to do.
God has always used common God-fearing people to accomplish His great deeds.
I believe both the Bible and our Constitution are the result of our perfect God (in the form of the Holy Spirit) working through common, imperfect men.
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 11:23 AM
Personally, I’m ready and willing to debate those “elitist schmucks” on the issues. Conservative principles hold up to logic while McCainistic liberalism falls apart the minute one has to argue that it really wasn’t amnesty or that McCain really didn’t trade away Constitutional freedoms in the name of CFR.
The problem is that far too many of the McCain supporters don’t respect the views of social conservatives and evangelicals. In fact most of them, McCain included, loathe social conservatives and want to drive them from the GOP. It is an arrogance, IMO, that will result in Obama winning in November.
highhopes on June 5, 2008 at 11:26 AM
I am not trying to convince you. You should continue to vote for those who have sold conservatives down the river while telling you that you have to vote for them or a democrat could get elected. You should keep voting for them because maybe they will see the light if they keep winning elections.
King of the Britons on June 5, 2008 at 11:27 AM
By sending the message to the GOP that it is unacceptable to drive out the social conservatives and evangelicals for a platform virtually identical to that of the Democrat Party! I can’t speack for Al-Ozarka but, for me, the GOP needs to understand that they won’t be getting my vote when they put a political Judas and unfit candidate up for election!
Third party candidates are a non-starter in America but that doesn’t mean we have to support either party when they put up equally bad men for office.
highhopes on June 5, 2008 at 11:30 AM
Here’s the problem as I see it with that theory applied to our current situation, or as I like to call them, the Democrat Lite party. Everyone is making the analogy to the Carter Years. Yet, before the Carter Years, we had a country club blue blood Republican named Jerry Ford. He lost the election to Carter, but he was President and was about as much of a disaster as Carter was. The Gas Crisis under Carter began as an Energy Crisis under Nixon and Ford.
In essence, we’ve nominated the Jerry Ford of our Generation. Not real conservative, reasonably well liked by the other side, because he’s reasonably Liberal for them. The only difference is that Ford was elected at the tail end of the period when Liberal was the standard. Eisenhower was a Liberal Republican if you recall. Truman was a Conservative Democrat.
Conservative was the punch line of a joke for much of the time in question. Until Ronald Reagan. Then he united the nation behind a message that was really a continuation of the Goldwater Republicans. He just delivered that message more succinctly.
So if you give me the option of enduring eight years of Ford/Carter again, in the form of McCain, who would so demoralize the Republican party in the next four years that he would be voted out and tossed aside by someone so liberal that he would make Obama look moderate, or just four years of Carter, then I’ll take the more painful in the short run choice.
McCain is going to lose, either now, or in four years. The only question you have to ask yourself is how much damage to Conservative Ideals do you want to do as he destroys the Republican Party? If he wants to destroy the power brokers in the form of the Country Club Blue Bloods, then let him. If he demands to wrap himself in the Conservative nomenclature while espousing Man Made Global Warming Hype, let him fail now. If he wants to claim that the conservative answer is amnesty now, amnesty forever, let him drown on election day.
If you call yourself a Conservative, you have no choice but to vote against McCain. If you call yourself a Republican, and you believe it’s party over principal, then you should still vote against McCain because he’s turning the Party into Democratic Lite, or continuing the trend of the “Mavericks” in doing so.
I will either vote for Obama, if it’s close in Georgia and he actually has a chance to win the state, or a Third Party if it isn’t. If someone is going to destroy the nation, which the Liberal policies of McCain will do just as fast as Obama, then let it be a true Liberal instead of a Republican. If McCain passes his carbon cap and trade plan, Republicans will be rightly blamed with destroying the economy in favor of the hype by history. I’ll be one of those leading the charge in blaming Republicans.
If McCain gets his way regarding Amnesty, then I’ll be leading the charge to register People as Democrats in order to take over that party, and return it to the days of the Scoop Jackson Democrats. To paraphrase Gingrich, by electing McCain, you’ll see the Republican Party whither on the vine and die.
It may be as much as ten or even twenty years before the Republican Party is again a real equal with the Democrats again.
Take the short term pain and defeat McCain, and demand only Conservative Candidates who will demonstrate a real difference from the Failed Liberal Policies of the Democrats.
Snake307 on June 5, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Point of clarification:
I don’t treat the Bible and Our Constitution as equals.
The Bible says all Scripture is inspired.
Our Constitution doesn’t claim to be inspired, but we know from the Declaration of Independence what our founding fathers believed:
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 11:36 AM
COOL! red pill. However I must say as you implied that there are lots of Christians who are Democratic too. Many ‘African-Americans’ are on fire for Jesus, but they vote Democrat.
It’s like Muslims. They aren’t bad people, they love God. But they need to understand that their actions don’t support their beliefs. If they love God, they shouldn’t destroy His creation. Just like if the African American community wants to grow, the first step is to get rid of abortions. We all know that the government will be available to help them financially if they are struggling young families.
Thanks for sharing Red Pill.
ThackerAgency on June 5, 2008 at 11:41 AM
In 10000 years when the half life of the Iran Supplied terrorist bomb wears off.
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 11:44 AM
The same holy spirit that told you Huck would be POTUS?
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Why do societies of people need a government?
To secure our God-given unalienable rights.
It’s interesting to note various definitions of the word secure:
Definitions 1, 2, and 3 are how conservatives understand “securing” (protecting) your rights.
Definitions 4, 5, and 6 lean toward how liberals understand “securing” (taking away and restraining) your rights.
It’s pretty clear to me that our founders meant protecting and ensuring your rights, not taking your rights away. Things like the 1st and 2nd amendments make that clear.
Government is necessary for man, because without one, there is anarchy and your God-given unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are threatened.
But big government is just as bad as anarchy, because big government also threatens your God-given unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
An aborted baby has had its God-given unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness forcibly taken away.
When a society doesn’t defend the weakest among it, that society is doomed because eventually rights will be taken away from everyone.
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 11:56 AM
On the other hand, the hope that an Obama win will result in another Reagan is somewhat misplaced. Reagan was a great coalition builder and he also had a voice that people listened to, even before Ford. There isn’t anyone in the wings right now that can replicate the Carter/Reagan scenario.
And as long as we’re on the subject, while I yield to no one in my admiration of The Gipper, I think it’s kind of silly to keep hoping another Reagan comes along. Reagan was the right man at the right time. But we are in different times, and we need a leader who is appropriate for them. I’m not saying it’s McCain, but I am saying I don’t see anyone currently in waiting who can pull off what Reagan did. Hoping for “The Next Reagan” is, in my opinion, akin to some woman hoping that The White Knight will appear out of nowhere and sweep her off her feet.
JohnTant on June 5, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Yes.
Red Pill on June 5, 2008 at 11:59 AM
So…St Paul is the basis for the bill of rights?
Dont get me wrong, I agree with the basis of our governing philosophy, but I think ol Harry (a scholar he was not) may have been puching it a a bit.
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Also, inre the “if you call yourself a conservative” formulation:
I actually call myself an American and I vote for the candidate whom I think is the best. In the current field, McCain is better than Bob Barr.
JohnTant on June 5, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Sigh…
Squid Shark on June 5, 2008 at 12:02 PM
Um…yeah…”send a message”…that’s always worked in the past.
“virtually identical to that of the Democrat Party”
Puh-leese.
First: Do some research before you write.
Second: You’re going to allow in the most pro-abortion president in the history of the country and let him pick Supreme Court Justices (probably with fillibuster-proof majorities in congress and three Justices over 70) and yet whine about the GOP driving “out the social conservatives and evangelicals.”
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM
JohnTant on June 5, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Well said.
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 12:13 PM
If so, they will be hated and shunned by people who do not share their politics
In politics that is not a threat but an enticement
If Barr gets a man’s vote, he is getting the vote of someone who does not perceive he would be getting anything from McCain and the current GOP.
People do not vote to satisfy the needs of others. They are not traitors. They are voters, just like people who vote for Obama.
The problem with pressuring people to vote for a candidate who has promised to not represent them is the secret ballot. It stands in the way of punishing the secret voters.
You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. With grown men, you cannot even lead them to water in a free country.
If you want voters to obey you to satisfy your needs, you had better find something in it for them, more than the platitude that the GOP will not hurt you as much as the DEMs.
The GOP has had two Presidencies to make that case and did a good job of convincing the ‘unwashed voter’ that his needs are garbage.
The GOP is working harder than the democrats to shovel in illegals and dragging its heels while displaced workers lose their homes.
Meanwhile McCain has called the great unwashed lazy and replaceable. How much more enticing can it get?
While many here see the mortgage crisis as people getting what they deserve, the man losing his home because of divorce, medical bills or job loss is not in the mood to do a favor for the elites. The current foreclosure rate is .99 percent or one in every 100 homes. People cannot liquidate to move to new work, but cannot pay for gas to drive to distant jobs.
Voters do not care what you think is good for them. They vote on their own preceptions which are being ignored. They are so screwed already that promising less turns of the screwdriver will not make them your friend
entagor on June 5, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Hate to say it, but this really is an unconstituinal war, as was Desert Storm, Viet Nam, and Korea. Congress has given power to the President to wage war which was never intended by the framers of the Constitution.
We need to get back to the whole debate needed for a REAL Decleration of War before we invade.
Now we have this silly War Powers thing where the Congress, even those who voted to act, can come in later and try to stop a war already in progress…. not the way its supposed to work.
Its like the question of why will still defend GERMANY? or spend our money defending JAPAN? Are we concerned about invasion? IMO US Military troops should be defending US at home… and then able to get to a conflict… not forward deployed playing occupation troops in countries who are our allies.
Romeo13 on June 5, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Actually, I think ‘annoying self-righteous lemmings’ would be more accurate.
lol…Terrye, you’re the gift that keeps on giving. ‘Kneel before Zod!’ Let’s see, as someone pointed out, many of us only ally ourselves with the GOP; we consider ourselves conservatives first. So, if the ‘party’ wanders off and nominates some backstabbing insider lowlife who’s going to govern as a democrat, we aren’t necessarily going to grab the ankles on the party sayso. What really irritates me about your statement is the breathtaking arrogance..we think we can thumb our noses at the will of the party; I didn’t realize the ‘will of the party’ had governing control of what I do in my life. Should I get a new job? What is the will of the party? Should I grab a wooden stick and ‘explain’ the benefits of voting for McCain to a wayward voter? What is the ‘will of the party’? Do you actually believe this cr*p you type? Or do you giggle yourself silly? I don’t know how you can type something like you did with a straight face; you sound like d*mn communist. Cheerleaders with nerf bat arguments..brownshirt wannabes. Like I’ve said a dozen times before..go work on some democrats with the global warming angle. You’ll get farther.
austinnelly on June 5, 2008 at 12:18 PM
so you agree you are voting for Obama by proxy through Barr.
and giving Obama full control over National Security and a huge Dem majority in the Congress and Senate. brilliant.
once we get National Healthcare its not reversible. after Goldwater got crushed we got the “Great Society” which is not reversible.
jp on June 5, 2008 at 12:19 PM
I call myself an American and I have no choice but to vote for the good of my country, not dabble in “if we do this-then this might happen-but if we do….” childish theories.
Sorry that I don’t agree with your “master plan” of giving the other side massively more power in order to defeat them. I just don’t see where that’s ever worked before. Your plan strikes me more as “Lets attack Stalangrad in Winter. They’ll never expect that. We’ll win for sure.”
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 12:20 PM
If you are calling me a hopeless romantic, I’ll take that title. I’m not willing to settle for anything less than a conservative. I don’t even need a Reagan, really. I think we have some decent prospects two or three tiers down. However, I think that McCain is the wrong candidate, not just at this time, but at anytime.
I don’t think that either the Republicans, or the Conservatives, will recover from a McCain Presidency in the next decade. That is too high a price to pay for any victory. That is a Pyhrric victory if there ever was one. We win, but the cost is nearly everything? (I know that’s not the exact use of Pyhrric, get over it.) To win, we have to accept Global warming and Cap and Trade of carbon emissions. OK, so to win in November, we have to lead the charge to destroy the economy? Let me guess, the plan is that someone, perhaps Congress, perhaps McCain, will do the right thing later?
We passed McCain’s campaign finance reform that way. The Senators all said they thought it violated free speech, but they passed it hoping the President would veto. President Bush had said he’d Veto, then said he Might Veto, then he signed it saying it was Unconstitutional. He hoped that someone else had the courage to do the right thing, in the form of the Supreme Court.
Now, we can’t talk about a candidate in a negative manner for sixty days before a General Election. All because we waited for someone else to do the right thing. Worked out pretty well didn’t it? It sucked big time.
So I’m campaigning against McCain, because I believe that the Conservative Movement, and the Republican Party can endure a loss this November. I don’t think we can afford a win this November. Because if the “Conservative Party” helps pass Global Warming and Amnesty by our President leading the charge, I will never vote Republican again. I will never support Republicans again. I will register as a Democrat. If we’re going Liberal, I might as well be on the winning team, the team that is making the rules, and setting the agenda based upon their terms. As long as we’re chasing their crumbs, I won’t be a party to it.
Before you start with the doom and gloom scenario game, remember that McCain has many of the same policies that Obama has.
Snake307 on June 5, 2008 at 12:29 PM
We’re being self-righteous. Oh that’s rich comming from the “if you’re conservative you can’t vote for McCain,” “McCain has to earn my vote!,” “The country/Republican Party has to be taught a lesson,” crowd.
You folks define self-righteous. Your conservatism is to pure for you to sully it by voting for McCain. You’ve been offended by the “nose-thumbing” that the GOP has given you and now you are going to take your frisbee and go home. “To hell with the country. They’ll learn their lesson, they’ll learn that I was right. One day they’ll all learn.”
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Snake307 on June 5, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Your logic is stunning.
29Victor on June 5, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »