Stating the facts of Obombem’s socialist associations and actions will bring those voters who are sitting on the fence and facing economic problems back to reality.

Obombem’s base is based on support from those who have been re-educated in a socialist based school system that DEM politicians have created. Those who are from broken homes the socialist DEM politicians created to maintain a base of voters dependent on them for their handout.

Now DEM politicians are working hard to gain control of their oppositions banks so they can control where our money goes and what it is used on.

McCain was right in not attacking Obombem personally, but staying on message about what DEM politicians are going to do to you if we do not raise up on Nov. 4th and tell DEM Politicians “We are mad as Hell, and are not going to take it anymore”. Get your friends (living, legal, and livid) to vote in the right place and the right time. Do not let DEM politicians allow their Acorn’s to take root who will vote early, often, and under many names (living and dead).

Every time we try to be moderate we lose. We need to be distinct in our identity as an alternative ideology to the Democrats. We need to stop trying to find a niche as Democrat Light.

Hawthorne on October 10, 2008 at 6:25 PM

You have it wrong. Every time the GOP tries to be ideological purists they lose. As for the Reagan Dems they are moderate but that doesn’t mean they were in total agreement with Reagan on every issue.
The reason why “Big C conservatives” don’t form their own party is that they know they will never win without the voters in the middle. If they are truly such purists and ideologically superior why don’t the “Big C’s” go form their own party? Answer: Recognizing they have nowhere near the numbers to be a viable third party they want the moderates to be useful idiots who will give them their vote but never have the mutual respect afforded to them.
Kind of like the loonie left and its treatment of left of center Dems – check that, exactly like the loonie left.

This is not the party of Reagan anymore and it has to do with the far right wing’s inflexibility.

Bradky on October 10, 2008 at 6:25 AM

I simply reject your assertions. The Republican party has reached ALL of its recent success by being Conservative. Please notice the big C there. The values of Reagan brought the country into the arms of the Republicans. The rantings of Ross Perot showed more conservative legs in the populace. The Contract with America produced a good stretch of Republican control in Congress.

It is when the Republicans turned from their conservative values that they started to have problems. Lack of spending discipline and too much political meandering has created the disaffection with Republicans. The poster boy for the Neo-cons, G.W. Bush has devastated the Republican identity with his lame attempts to out-liberal the Democrats.

Let me make this clear. The people who like liberal philosophy and government are already Democrats. They identify themselves as Democrats and will vote that way even if they run a conservative Dem against a liberal Republican. To them party loyalty is a religion. Just like it seems to be preached among some of the Republicans here.

The Reagan Democrat is the “moderate” voter that you seem to be referring to. Yet they supported a President who was unabashed and unapologetic about being conservative. The power of the Republican party is the conservative base not the imagined mass of moderates. Every time we try to be moderate we lose. We need to be distinct in our identity as an alternative ideology to the Democrats. We need to stop trying to find a niche as Democrat Light.

All of these conservative talk show hosts; Michael Savage, Rush Limbo, Sean Hannity, those numbskulls with all their tens of millions of listeners they didn’t do anything! They didn’t build a movement on the ground!

apacalyps on October 10, 2008 at 2:57 PM

Agree that we need some organizing, but you’re being a little rough on the talk show hosts. They’re not going to be able to put together thousands of grassroots organizations in towns and cities across the country.

That’s what community organizers are for.

They say the Devi’s best trick was convincing people he didn’t exist. The liberal’s best trick was convincing conservatives that other conservatives don’t exist.

In the short run the socialist will win. But in the long run? There is bound to be some true anaysis. Well if freedom endures if not the socialist win everything and this is the end of history.

A majority of voters (52%) favor John McCain’s plan for the federal government to buy up distressed mortgages and refinance them so homeowners can stay in their homes, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Thirty-five percent (35%) oppose the plan.

Democrats like McCain’s plan more than Republicans, even though Barack Obama opposes it. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Democratic voters think it’s a good idea, compared to 47% of Republicans – and 49% of unaffiliated voters.

Seventy percent (70%) of African-American voters favor McCain’s plan, as do 50% of white voters.

My real anger is towards old Europe who profited from the UN sanctions regime while watching the US/UK do the heavy lifting and abandoned us when the war became hot. I also do not think WMD should have been the causus beli. It should have been a resumption of the first Gulf War due to lengthy violations of several resolutions that had “severe consequences” promised should they be violated.

Goodeye_Closed on October 10, 2008 at 9:08 AM

The principal reason for the failure of liberal foreign policy is their refusal to admit that savages exist, or deal with them accordingly. The sacred tenets of multiculturalism dictate that every nation is at least equal to the United States, and if they seem markedly backward or hostile, it is because we are too bigoted to see them clearly.

All of Obama’s foreign policy positions make perfect sense if you keep this in mind: 9/11 was bad, but we had it coming (as his friend Ayers maintains) and it wouldn’t have happened again, because terrorists are reasonable people and they made their point with that single attack. Saddam would have been weeks away from reaching a reasonable accomodation with the West, if a skilled, charismatic leader steeped in liberal multicultural principles had been negotiating with him, instead of conservative neocon cowboys. Iran will surely respond to such negotiations. The Iraq War was, therefore, both a terrible waste and a crime, perpetrated against a peaceful kite-flying people.

This is also why liberals were perfectly OK with bombing Serbia, and have never expressed even momentary concern about collateral damage. White-skinned fascists are the only enemy they are prepared to consider morally inferior to America, even Republican America, and can therefore be bombed from 50,000 feet. Decades-long military deployments against such foes are not even worth mentioning, never mind protesting against.

Europe, like any other long-term, multi-generational welfare recipient, is very insecure about its relationship with its protector and economic provider, the United States. If they get the President they want, and the U.S. economy that enables their socialist policies continues to slide, or they require military protection, they will suddenly become very nostalgic for Republican governance. Nobody is more hostile and bitter than a welfare recipient receiving a lecture from one of the taxpayers that feeds him, but that bitterness turns to sugar very quickly when the gravy train is threatened.

I am a true conservative who happened to support Iraq and I believe it went as well as can be expected. This was and is a REAL war, not a simple one operation “action” that we had become acustomed to. We had to learn how to beat an insurgency as there were not any tried and true methods for doing so.

I also believed the war was inevitible. I’d rather get it over with than to have continued wasting efforts at containment.

My real anger is towards old Europe who profited from the UN sanctions regime while watching the US/UK do the heavy lifting and abandoned us when the war became hot. I also do not think WMD should have been the causus beli. It should have been a resumption of the first Gulf War due to lengthy violations of several resolutions that had “severe consequences” promised should they be violated.

What a fool you are. You blame conservatives? Lol, ok. Look, he was simply the last man standing, the most recognizable figure, the establishment endorsed Republican. There was a 3 way split in the vote in important states.

See how easy that was, and I didn’t even blame the liberals in the GOP such as yourself. Pretty easy huh! :)

We are doing our best to push your candidate over the finish line, there is no need to start an intraparty war now, because if he loses it will be because of people like yourself who are unwilling to unite and look forward.

We must win!

If McCain were half the leader we would like him to be……

OH CRAP – I just don’t like having to vote for McCain.