Isn’t that just another way of saying that McCains stands on the issues put him at odds with most Republicans? Your quarrel is with McCain, not us.
flenser on June 13, 2008 at 5:41 PM

*BUZZERRRRRRRRRRRRR*

Wrong, flenser. Try again. Maybe you can correctly guess what drain he was talking about. I’ll give you a hint: it’s you.

wise_man on June 13, 2008 at 6:40 PM

Exactly, because all true conservatives believe drilling is bad, increasing supply is bad, and a temporary tax cut (with no real effect on prices) is the only true solution.

How could a Conservative not agree with McCain. Trying to tell me that increasing supply would lower price or something. Take that voodoo somewhere else troll, wiseman and me aren’t buying your snake-oil economic theories.

We’re going to go with McCain’s tried and true “lower the prices by decreasing taxes, and people will want less, and use less, so prices will steadily go down”… anything else is madness.

Politicians are like pets: you get more of the behavior you reward. I don’t want to encourage the kind if idiocy that McCain exhibits.

misterpeasea

How can you say that. Haven’t you seen the Congressional Leadership reports on poll numbers?

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/14/1019748.aspx

Obviously what we need to encourage “Conservatives” is to vote for the SCHIP and the homeowner bailout, and subsidies for farmers making record profits. If we can’t agree on that, you’re obviously a false conservative and a troll and should be ignored.

Stop drilling, stop production, subsidies for all, massive handouts and spending… the only true conservative principles.

Did I miss anything wise_man? Well I forgot to make cheap shots at people’s handles, so I’ll leave that for you. But I think I made the case for McCain pretty clear, showing exactly how he wants it; didn’t I?

This must be a record your standard operating procedure for you, flenser.

Why are you still allowed to comment here?

This place must have no moderation of the comments and the users at all.

We have enormous resources on federal lands — an estimated 1.5 trillion recoverable barrels of oil in shale, for instance — and he needs to take action to start accessing those reserves.
Ed Morrissey

Isn’t there some way to turn lumbering carbon emitting Polar Bears into oil?

Oh I know the answer.

If I tell you the answer, you won’t be able to learn for yourselves.

How noble and selfless you are!

But as you keep telling us, by not agreeing with you we are Benedict Arnolds destroying America. Surely if you really loved America, you’d place correcting us and saving America ahead of your desire for us to learn for ourselves.

And lay off the personal attacks on me, you are digging your own grave here, flenser.

Are you threatening to kill me?

As for “personal attacks”, you are the master at those. If you were prohibited from calling people trolls and liars you would not be able to post here at all.

the only idiocy there will be as a result is a democrat victory. This will be worse than a republican defeat. I don’t know why i need to constantly explain this to another conservative

Explain what difference it makes to conservatives which liberal wins the WH.

Given that the Republican Party is (or was) the home of conservatives, explain why a liberal Republican becoming President is not worse for conservatism than a liberal Democrat doing so.

Bill Clinton was elected, and stayed in the whitehouse for 8 years. How well did that work out for conservatives?

It worked out very well. We got the first conservative and Republican House majority in decades. Let’s do that again.

The election will be happening this november. Democrat versus republican.

And liberal versus liberal. Conservatives need to look elsewhere.

Ummm….you have McCain.

“HW exhibited undesirable behavior, and he was punished.“ And Bill Clinton was elected, and stayed in the whitehouse for 8 years. How well did that work out for conservatives?

“I’d gladly give Bambi the presidency.” So would democrats. What other things do you have in common with democrats. As for me. I have little if anything in common with democrats, and I like it that way.

“Who are you trying to fool?” I’m speaking to one. What I am trying to do is tell you the truth. And you are either a conservative who is incapable of understanding the truth, or a liberal who is here to convince as many real conservatives here not to vote for Obama, and you understand the truth completely. Either way, what you advocate and wish others do like you is harmful to my country, and I won’t let you do this on this conservative site as long as I am able to respond to your lies.

“When the nomination was actually being contested, he struggled to get 40% of the vote.” And then he clinched the vote and will become the nominee because he got more votes than anyone else. Had a real conservative gotten more votes by republicans in the primaries, then John McCain would be back in the senate right now, and not on the campaign trail.

“You aren’t explaining anything.” Yes, I am. And you are propagandizing and spamming the thread with lies.

The election will be happening this november. Democrat versus republican. Seems like a good focus of my time. Please inform me of any other presidential elections that I am not focusing on that I should widen my focus.

wise_man on June 14, 2008 at 5:56 PM

Uh. You don’t get more of the behavior you reward? You get more of the behavior that you punish? How very wise.

When George H W Bush said ‘read my lips, no new taxes’ and reneged on his promise, he was defeated.

You appear to be having an argument with yourself. HW exhibited undesirable behavior, and he was punished.

After 8 years of Bill Clinton, George W Bush was elected. How did that idiotic protest vote against Bush turn out? Was Bush’s father bad behavior suitably punished?

The idiotic protest vote against HW Bush? I’d say it turned out pretty good. We got a Republican House for the first time in 40ish years, as I recall. Citing Clinton’s presidency doesn’t help McCain’s case. I’d gladly give Bambi the presidency if it would mean that the Republicans would regain control of the Congress.

Was Bush’s father’s bad behavior punished? I’d say yes, he didn’t get re-elected.

the man who the republicans overwhelmingly voted for in the nomination process

Who are you trying to fool? When the nomination was actually being contested, he struggled to get 40% of the vote. He never got as much as 50% until he was the only candidate. And that’s Republicans (and independents and Democrats!), not conservatives. His strongest states were, of course, blue states.

the only idiocy there will be as a result is a democrat victory. This will be worse than a republican defeat. I don’t know why i need to constantly explain this to another conservative, unless you are not.

Uhm. A Democrat victory will be worse than a Republican defeat. Won’t they be, you know, the same?

You aren’t explaining anything. And you appear to be narrowly focused on the presidential election, and ONLY the presidential election, with no awareness of, say, the day after, or the election after. Or the negative effect of a liberal idiot like McCain on Republican politicians and Republican electorate.

Not very wise, man.

overwhelmingly voted for in the nomination process,

uh, where you paying attention during the primaries?? we have delaware and south carolina to thank for this clusterfuck of a candidate. he has one area that we know for sure he is better than bambi, the war. other than that he wants to demonize the free market, raise oil prices and give citizenship to illegal aliens. and those are just 3 issues i can think of where he is way too liberal. hell he just might take away more 1st amendment rights as president. the man cant be trusted. if someone has to be blamed for ruinious policies let it be a liberal. makes it hard to defend a conservative position when someone can throw back “but your president doesnt think so”.

there are more of me (conservatives)than there are of him. if he wants our votes he needs to change for us, not us change for him. if he gets the presidency w/o the conservative than maybe the conservative movement is out of steam. if he doesnt and bambi runs things in the ground its johnny’s fault, not mine. he didnt have to come all the way over, just a little. but he refuses too acknowledge the validity of any conservative of substance. the ones he does “agree” with are ones he cant deliver anyway due to a dem congress.

Politicians are like pets: you get more of the behavior you reward. I don’t want to encourage the kind if idiocy that McCain exhibits. misterpeasea on June 14, 2008 at 5:14 PM

Wrong.

When George H W Bush said ‘read my lips, no new taxes’ and reneged on his promise, he was defeated. After 8 years of Bill Clinton, George W Bush was elected. How did that idiotic protest vote against Bush turn out? Was Bush’s father bad behavior suitably punished?

If you want a real change, then all of the people who vote in the republican primaries need to vote for conservative candidates. If people don’t support the man who the republicans overwhelmingly voted for in the nomination process, then the only idiocy there will be as a result is a democrat victory. This will be worse than a republican defeat. I don’t know why i need to constantly explain this to another conservative, unless you are not.

Makes you wonder.

He lifted this crap verbatim from the loony leftists. It’s unbelievable that Republicans nominated this idiot.

Had that been the case we should be electing our fourth Reagan by now. Sadly however it is never the case.

patrick neid on June 13, 2008 at 10:54 PM

I disagree. The number of conservative politicians increased during the Reagan era, and afterward. The Republicans’ respect for seniority is to blame for HW. And HW’s squishiness is to blame for Clinton.

The biggest problem is that conservatives who go to DC start “maturing” and “growing in office.” Power tends to corrupt, and there’s a lot of power in DC. One more argument to stick to the Constitution with respect to federalism. FDR did so much damage to this country, it’s a crime the way he’s been deified. Johnson, Nixon, and W. haven’t helped. It’s funny that Nixon and W., two liberal Republicans, are demonized by the Left.

Politicians are like pets: you get more of the behavior you reward. I don’t want to encourage the kind if idiocy that McCain exhibits.

If I tell you the answer, you won’t be able to learn for yourselves. You need to be able to come up with the correct answer by yourselves.

And lay off the personal attacks on me, you are digging your own grave here, flenser.

If you don’t know the answer to that question, then I can’t help you on that one.

That’s an admission that you don’t know the answer either. I don’t know why you imagine it’s a devastating rebuttal.

Our system is not perfect and individuals don’t get their way. Some choose to participate and some decide to make a mockery of our election. If you want to be a clown, then by all means.

Every election ends up to two people.

Actually, very few elections end up with two people. There are multiple candidates in every US presidential election.

I see you ignored this, so here you go again.

Your sudden sensitivity is amusing, since just yesterday you were calling me a “liar” repeatedly, without ever pointing to anything I said that was even incorrect. Can I assume that you’ll treat others as you wish to be treated from now on?

I’ll take a non-answer as a no.

Not voting for McCain will guarantee you a non-conservative president.

Perhaps. But voting for McCain will guarantee me a non-conservative president also. I say we dump McCain and go with someone else. And that’s what I’m doing, regardless of what you do.

you stated:

“Here’s some reasoning: if McCain wins the election, we’re going to get more McCains, because politicians will see that he was rewarded for his behavior. If McCain doesn’t win, we’ll get fewer McCains, for the same reason.”

I wish that were the case, not more McCain’s necessarily, but replicants of a nature. Had that been the case we should be electing our fourth Reagan by now. Sadly however it is never the case. Every election is a bizarre twist of time and space spawning candidates who at other times would not be considered for VP.

This time it is Obama and McCain.

I play the cards I’m dealt.

Tom DeLay: John McCain Has Done the Most to Hurt the GOP

Unless there was a time that Ralph Nader was elected president. Like – about a dozen times already.

Ross Perot, he was elected president, right? Not Clinton.

And who could forget Anderson. He was elected after Carter and Reagan only had one term.

You could vote for someone else.

But that wouldn’t be wise.

Obama.

Or McCain.

wise_man on June 13, 2008 at 7:50 PM

That’s it? The sum total of the considerations? How very wise.