LATEST UPDATE MAY 12, 2008:

Duncan Hunter will be written in on this Republican's presidential ballot this year come November--voting absentee overseas--Your's Truly will Fedex to the USA around mid-to-late October time frame. Between now and then if a legitimate individual who is actually capable of serving as President of the United States (has the necessary free market/corporate, government or military leadership credentials over the years, and/or in managing huge budgets and/or leading tens of thousands of people in a large organization with consistently good results), gains ballot access in enough states to signify an Electoral Victory were he/she to take all those states, and his/her party had a solid, conservative platform, has significant name-brand national conservative endorsements, and is noted, hated and most importantly feared or ridiculed by the MSM, then I will switch the Duncan Hunter write-in vote in to an actual vote for such a Conservative Alternative for President. As usual, loyal conservative Republicans for state and local officies will get my vote from there on down, on the ballot.

I will be NOT be voting for ANY socialists or RINOs/liberal-lovers this year for President, take that to the bank! My vote will be on principle and principle alone. That (upon many other choices and subsequent actions in my lifetime) is what I will stand and face my Creator with when that judgement day comes. When I raised my voice, speaking for myself, under oath (which is what a signed ballot actually is) did I tell the truth and say that the names I checked or wrote in represent the best choices for our nation as well as the closest thinking to mine?

Some may do otherwise--fine, that is your perogative, but as for me, I am not going to LIE UNDER OATH on my 2008 ballot when that moment comes. I know I can live with my conscience afterward.

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I DESPISE the foul species known as the Open Border Liberal Democrat!

I will vote against them every time.

I despise them SO MUCH, I will not vote for them for WHATEVER REASON, even when they have a (R) after their name on the ballot.

ELECTION 2008 UPDATE (27 December 2007)

I do not want to be called a flip-flopper, a rationalizer, a GOP-bot or a hypocrite. I will not be vigorously opposed to any GOP RINO or Open Border candidates in 2008 in the Republican Primaries, only to then rationalize, equivocate and change my tune on FR, coming out in support of one of them if he should become the GOP Nominee--as the so-called "lesser of two evils" and just because he has a (R) after his name.

So on December 26, 2007 here on FR, I made four open pledges on four separate threads about four of these top 2008 GOP Presidential Primary Candidates. [It now appears the pledge regarding John McCain will be the most applicable one.]

These threads were about the following candidates:

Giuliani

My Pledge

Huckabee (ESPECIALLY HIM!)

My Pledge

McCain

My Pledge

Romney

My Pledge

I stated in each case that I will not support any of these four men if they receive the nomination, if there is a viable Independent Conservative Alternative running, who has gotten ballot-qualified in enough U.S. states to signify enough electoral votes which could theoretically give him the presidency. I will stick to that pledge, in the spirt of unwavering Conservatism, and before all of my Fellow Freepers. For me as a CONSERVATIVE, each of these above four men are not suited to be my next President, doctrinally speaking--in my opinion--and nope, I won't rationalize it later--regardless which demon from the pit goes on to win the Democrat nomination.

--AmericaninTokyo (and now back to our regular programming....)

***************************************

Two key issues with me (not to mention, AMNESTY and ILLEGAL ALIENS!).

1) IRAQ

It is not unpatriotic--nor are we "DU plants on FR"--to call a spade a spade, to read the handwriting on the wall, and say this has been one big massive four-year FUBAR both in planning and execution as well as overall general assumptions (total victory trajectory vs. "nation building" for example)--until we finally got our act straight and did things the way they should have been done from the start (SURGE/MASSIVE MERCILESS PRESENCE). You would think we would have learned a few things in this country from the 1960s and 1970s about NO-WIN WARS in far off places most Americans cannot find on a map, run by stupid Ivy League bureaucrats who don't know what troops want and can do, and who often can't even park their own bicycles straight in Foggy Bottom. Our troops never deserved this morass, as great as they are. Nor did the country. It is a shame we returned to our vomit and did not learn some important lessons. Hopefully we will learn this in the future, as we cannot afford to fight wars only as the US Military, but not as the Country At Large.

Americans nowadays are only rallying around a clear "winner", otherwise they are demoralized very easily. We need to strike quickly and massively so that the enemy has no way to drag and draw things out. We have to fight wars not only pitched against our enemies on the one hand, but also fighting off brutal liberal traitors on the other who eat away at our resolve. Therefore, if going a) declare a war officially by Congress, and 2) resolve to WIN immediately. The American People will in return follow.

2) NORTH KOREA

The same goes for the shameless appeasement of North Korea through buying them off (reprehensible funneling of ill-gotten DPRK crime money from Hong Kong through Wachovia Bank) by the appeasing Bush State Department. Kim Jong il WON...and by his behavior we will continue to see that he precisely is aware of his own victory.

I can only think of one approach that is worse than the Bush approach on North Korea, and that is what Bill Clinton did. John Bolton is completely correct on this issue, and the Bush Administration, completely wrong in this new, yet failed Carterite/Clintonist-Type Approach of Appeasment. The George W. Bush late 2006-2007 State Department-prompted shift from "Regime Change" and "Strangulation of the DPRK", to one of open embracing of Pyongyang, bribery, phony deals in Beijing, rapproachment/detente, carrots but no sticks, and possible normalization of relations, is bound to fail.

Freepers did not accept this under Clinton.

No way should we accept it under George W. Bush, either.

But that's just ME. I never did like koolaid too much...