Posted on 10/29/2008 11:56:01 AM PDT by agrandis
Various of my friends and members of my extended family are urging me to vote for Sen. John McCain for President in the rapidly approaching general election. Few of them have much or anything positive to say about McCain himself, but they tell me that the dangers presented by the election of Barack Obama leaves us no alternative but to vote for McCain, thus blocking an Obama presidency. As always, we are told on all fronts that this is the "most important election in history."
For several reasons, I disagree with these friends and family members that our only alternative is to vote for John McCain.
Claim: McCain is the lesser of two evils.
There is not a real difference between the two presidential candidates of the major political parties in philosophy, worldview, or integrity. One is Black, and one is White. One is old, and one is young. I claim that, in spite of the rhetoric, this is where the differences end. In recent sound bites, on the topic of personal liberty and the Constitution, Obama sounds slightly more conservative than McCain. On abortion, McCain sounds a little more conservative than Obama. On foreign policy, McCain sounds slightly more hyper-interventionist than Obama, and neither sound conservative. But when you consider all of the rhetoric, their records, and the practical implications of their stated goals, all the supposed differences melt away, and we are left with another Bush Administration, or another Clinton Administration, with a slightly different flavor, but the same old direction for our nation: rapidly toward more foreign interventionism, more economic interventionism, more suppression of liberty, more complete reliance on government, more tax funding for all manner of evil, including abortion, unjust war, welfare for politically connected multinational corporations, more official corruption, and, eventually, bankruptcy, chaos and/or brutal totalitarianism.
To know how a President McCain would govern in the realm of economics, one only has to remember his actions of a few weeks ago, when he pushed for unprecedented powers for the Secretary of Treasury, and, along with Bush's urging and Obama's help, lead the way for the Senate to pass the infamous bailout bill, which was the exact bill which angry voters had just persuaded the House to reject, only now with over 450 pages of earmarks (pork), tax "extenders," and new powers for the IRS added to it. McCain publicly chided House Republicans for listening to their constituents and stopping the first monstrous bill in the House! Bush and McCain and Obama told us we were all going to suffer financial ruin if we did not pipe down and hand over our children's wallets to the banksters. Now that they have had their way, we have seen dramatic drops in all of the world's stock markets. What better example do we need to see that McCain and Obama are on the same page when it comes to economics?
What about the right to be armed? Surely McCain is better than Obama on that issue? For the answer to that question, I would direct the reader to this web address: http://www.gunowners.org/mccaintb.htm. It is a compendium put together by Gun Owner's of America, of John McCain's gun-control record.
What about immigration? More than even most Democrats, McCain has been a consistent advocate of uncontrolled immigration. In 2007, he was the co-sponsor of the McCain-Kennedy Act, which sought, among other things, to legalize the millions of illegal immigrants currently in the country. This was being pushed during the jostling for position in the primary elections, and was a very unpopular bill among the Republican rank-and-file in an election in which opposition to unchecked immigration was expected to play a huge role. Yet, somehow, John McCain managed to win the primary popular vote. Incidentally, none other than Barack Obama was an ardent supporter of this act, and also a co-sponsor.
The environment? See McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act.
Free speech? See the McCain-Feingold Act, a famously unconstitutional piece of legislation.
Foreign policy? Both candidates have advocated aggressive interventionism and nation-building. Both support our illogical and immoral policies in the Balkans, and hypocritically support the independence of a Muslim Kosovo, but oppose the independence of South Ossetia from Georgia. Both want to increase and expand our current quagmire in the Middle East.
Abortion, I am told, is where the important difference lies between John McCain and Barack Obama. Barack Obama is famously tolerant of all abortions, any time, any where. McCain, on the other hand, currently claims to be pro-life, and promises to select judges that are "strict constructionists," implying that he would nominate justices to the Supreme Court who would overturn Roe vs. Wade, if given the chance. But John McCain has flip-flopped on this issue, like so many others in his political career, several times. He has made statements in recent years that he does not want to see Roe vs Wade overturned. Also, McCain's role in promoting justice David Souter, the currently important role of Warren Rudman in McCain's campaign, and his voting record for past nominations in the Senate, is an indication of what kind of Supreme Court justices we really would get under a McCain presidency; they are not likely to be justices that would vote to overturn Roe vs Wade.
John McCain has repeatedly stated his support for Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, and has even implied that it should be increased.
McCain shows no tendencies to stop the over $1 billion of Federal funds that go to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America every year, and under a McCain presidency, funding for this and other abortion "services" would likely increase, as it has under the Bush Administration. Until those of us who are pro-life get away from the distraction of the fight for the Supreme Court, and trying to Federalize laws against a certain kind of murder, and instead focus on the right of a state to protect the lives of its citizens without Federal interference, and, more importantly, insist that those politicians who call themselves pro-life do all they can within their sphere to stop the taxpayer funding of abortions and pro-abortion propaganda, we will never make any political ground against the Culture of Death. It's easy to call oneself pro-life, but it's another thing to stand for life consistently.
Although conservatives today have chosen to support nearly all wars waged by the Federal government, and believe any and all justifications for these wars, unjust and needless wars are also the taking of innocent lives. In other words, it is state-sponsored mass murder. Why do we rightly speak out against the evil slaughter of millions of babies through abortion, but tolerate and even support the needless slaughter of hundreds of thousands of babies in other countries in wars that are based on government falsehoods and flimsy justifications?
Claim: McCain has better character.
Others will admit that there is no essential difference between the politics of McCain and Obama, but that Obama is a man of bad character, and associates with bad eggs, while McCain is a war hero.
While I, too, am very disturbed by Obama's personal and political associations, and do think his character is a relevant and important topic, I am equally disturbed by the associations of John McCain. Disturbingly, there is even some overlap in the nefarious associations of the two men. In the interest of space, I will leave it to the reader to investigate for themselves the following partial list of associations with John McCain: The regime in Libya, the regime in Georgia (the country, not the state), mob boss Joe "Bananas" Bonano, Charles Keating (how can we forget that?), George Soros, and Juan Hernandez (McCain's Director of Hispanic Outreach).
As for the designation of John McCain as a war hero, it is indisputable that he was shot down on a bombing raid, and that he spent over 5 years as a Prisoner of War (POW) in North Vietnam. However, what happened to him as a POW is disputed. Many Vietnam veterans, including some of his fellow POWs, claim that McCain cooperated with his communist captors without undergoing the torture he claims was administered. They claim that he was given special treatment by the North Vietnamese, because of his special status as the son of an Admiral, and because of his willingness to cooperate in producing propaganda with them.
These men who make these claims are also veterans, and were also held captive by the enemy as POWs, so there is no reason to automatically discount their claims, or to say they are less credible than McCain because of McCain's status as a war hero. Two things give credence to their claims, in my view. One is the frequency with which John McCain lies today (he has been caught in too many blatant and public lies to itemize here), proving that the truth is not something he finds to be important. Secondly, John McCain, as a US Senator, has doggedly stonewalled attempted investigations into the fate of the many POWs and MIAs left in Southeast Asia. The surviving loved ones of the many missing US Servicemen have been publicly belittled by McCain, and have been the recipients of displays of his famous violent temper, for simply wanting to know the truth about the fate of their missing family members. Further, McCain stated that no POWs in Vietnam were interrogated by Soviet agents. We now know through evidence and testimony that has since come to public light that this statement is not true, and also that McCain had to have known it was not true, based on his seat in the Senate. The demeanor of McCain toward these surviving family members of POWs and MIAs and their advocates, and his tireless efforts (teaming up with Senator John Kerry) to block their searches for answers, seems incongruous with his claims regarding his years as a POW.
John McCain's military career before being shot down in Vietnam was spotty, at best. He was known as a party animal, and lost five aircraft, including the one shot down over North Vietnam. Only two of these crashes could be considered combat-related, including a fiery explosion on an aircraft carrier that killed 134 sailors.
While I'm writing about character, I will mention the fact that McCain left his first wife after she was in a car wreck that left her confined to a wheelchair, for a younger, much richer woman who has better political connections. He may repudiate the foolishness of his youth, and one need not be perfect to advocate virtue, but the abandonment of his first wife does understandably cast doubt on his character, and does not put him on strong moral ground to advocate family values.
Claim: McCain's no good, but his VP pick is:
Some argue that I should vote for John McCain because of his running mate, Sarah Palin. They agree that there is no difference in the character or policy views of McCain and Obama, but that McCain is old, and may die in office, and the true conservative Palin will take his place. But leaving aside doubts of the stories about her fighting corruption within the GOP in Alaska, and whether her professed feminism is good or bad for her family and our society, Sarah Palin shows her true colors by even being willing to be the running mate of John McCain, and being willing to promote him and his politics. She has embraced McCain's politics, and has already been willing to compromise her past views. If she is half the woman her supporters think she is, she will be somehow removed by the current corrupt GOP leaders, or she will remove herself.
In conclusion, I believe that a John McCain presidency would be at least as bad for our nation and our families as an Obama presidency, and perhaps even worse, since he would be falsely viewed as the conservative choice of the voters, though he would run the country in no appreciably different way than would Barack Hussein Obama. (I use the phrase "run the country" because thanks to the Congresses and the Administrations of the last 20 years, the President of the United States is for all practical purposes a dictator.) As we have seen with George W Bush, a Republican President gets support from much of the conservative portion of the population when he does things that would incite near riot by the same people if he were a Democrat. Therefore, perhaps it is better for a Democrat to hold that obscenely powerful position for now, with the hope for some popular resistance to his actions, and some unity in the opposition among conservatives.
Each election, conservatives reluctantly vote for someone for President who is more progressive, more socialistic, and less Constitutional than the candidate in the previous election. When will it end? When will we say "no more?"
I have decided to vote for Chuck Baldwin, of the Constitution Party. I urge all Americans who are tired of the lawlessness, corruption, and increasing totalitarianism of our current government to vote with me for Chuck Baldwin, or to vote for another Third Party, or to write in someone else, or to not vote for President at all. Don't throw away your vote! Why choose between drowning and hanging? Why choose between Benito Mussolini and Vladimir Lenin? This election, let's not give these nihilistic demagogues our consent to govern us. Just say no to Ocain and Mcbama!
Thanks for reading...
Dan Jacobson
I fight what fights I can and I don't back down. I have also stood against a former GOP governor who was a Hillarycare shill that nearly bankrupted the state of Tennessee doing so. Just because some Moron has a -R after their name does not earn them my vote. Bob Dole and the Big Tent Freak Show was the final straw for me especially after Poppy Bush. I vote on the individuals stands on issues not their political party. Sometimes it's GOP sometimes it's Independent. But it's a voice and a stand none the less.
I don’t really care how you vote. If you think Osamabama has what it takes, then vote and kiss the military goodbye.
If you think McCain has what it takes, then champion the cause.
If you think neither of them is your ideal for a leader of the free world, the door from US of A is always open for those who wish to leave.
But don’t hang your excuses NOT to vote on the perceived “fact” that no one is worthy of your vote. If you have to excuse your choices and/or explain them, please leave by the nearest exit.
You certainly aren’t doing this county any good by saying someone else who ran earlier is a better choice than who is running now. We have a lot of traitors here; and some of them don’t really have anything bad to say, but don’t have anything good to say.
If you see yourself in what I’ve said, just buy a ticket out of the good ol’ US of A to anywhere that sympathizes with disgruntled “Americans.”
In case you've been napping the U.S. is close to sinking to third world status by policies of both DEMs and GOP. Amongst the ones supporting policy to make it such Obama and your hero John Amnesty Open Borders to get cheap labor for my rich corporate friends John McCain. Open your blind eyes.
Enemies? How about the radio show so called Mega Conservative whom after McCain got the nod told Republicans to vote Obama in the Dem Primaries? Worse yet the ones stupid enough to actually liten to him & go do it. Were you one of them? Just curious? Yet this man is adored and considered brilliant? You wouldn't know the enemy if he kicked ya in the teeth. If he was a Republican you'd say thank you sir may I have another.
Never mind forget you. I said what I said and posted on beliefs I have held since my sign on date.
Have you been smoking some wacky-tabacky?
Your ramblings make you sound like the north end of a southbound mule. You are so focused on doom and gloom that you can see no goodness in what America has to offer.
You seem to have been so whitewashed with the crumbs that have been thrown to you by various fear mongers that you have no common sense left.
My ancestors were here to meet others of my ancestors, and I suggest you check out your own lineage before you decide to cast aspersions on someone else. I will not leave this country, right or wrong. She is MY country, and I have not seen my ancestoral blood spilled for someone like you who has no ties to the land.
Fighting in Viet Nam doesn’t give you carte blanche to degrade those of us who fought for your right to be a butthead.
To set the record straight, oh-ye-of-little-knowledge, I don’t listen to the radio; I don’t watch MSM “news,” and I certainly don’t kowtow to someone who knows so little about whom I consider “enemies,” according to your definition.
If you really want to know who you’re dealing with, FReepmail me, and we’ll go one-on-one. Or are you too smart for that?
Right.
Too late, cva...you posted to The ‘Face.... like it or not, you’ll have to deal with it.
Either way it was a highly unethical idea and a lowering of ones personal standards to that which many accuse DEMs of. Yet he is honored with daily threads. Some people will never get it.
I give a ‘no-bump’ for the thread poster though!
So you admit you haven’t got a clue what you are talking about, which leads me to suspect everything else you say.
I don’t think it’s the least bit unethical. He wasn’t forcing anybody to vote a particular way, nor was he promising them anything for their vote.
Rush is one of the best things that has ever happened to the conservative movement. You obviously don’t get it. Too bad for you.
I challange you to show in Free Republic or any other forum I have posted under a simuliar name where I have ever claimed to be a NAM Vet. I’m 51 so do the math. One of the last things I did before leaving for Basic in October 76 was vote as I was 19 years old. I certainly think both parties sold NAM vets out but that’s another debate. No actually it isn’t as some troops fighting in Iraq face P.C. oriented Court Martials over insane R.O.E.’s while Sec of DEF, congress, and POTUS do nothing.
Voting is too sacred a duty and right to play games with it for any reason. I have to disagree with you and leave it at that.
Why vote for a nobody like Chuck Baldwin? Just write your own name in there if you want to protest vote. At least you can be fairly sure that you’re not a phony, no-chance perennial loser.
Oh. Golly. *bowing and scraping*
For someone smart enough to be on FR, you sure have a lot to learn. I don’t care if you are a WWII vet, a Korean War vet, a VN vet, a Desert Storm vet. You sound like someone who stayed in the foxhole and then bragged to your buddies Stateside how “brave” you were.
I have a grandson in a Stryker Brigade and one in the USMC K-9MPs, and either one of them would deck you for being such a coward. You should count your lucky stars that you live in America. In any other country, you would have been shot at sunrise for what you have said here today. Shame on you.
If you don’t like what the government of this country does, you have three choices: 1: You can leave, 2: You can vote for America, or 3: you can continue to snivel and have lots of Pity Parties.
You choice, ingrate.
So long Troll enough of your type. I don’t have to reply that is my choice :>}
(46,116 replies) Does this qualify me as a “troll?”
I suspect the stuff got too deep for you and you decided to turn tail and run. Not man enough to face me, eh?
Kewl. I can see you suffer from back trouble: That big yellow stripe is a dead giveaway.
WTF are you doing on FR with your nasty subversive comments? Go tell your mother she wants you. Better yet, go play on the freeway.
I am a registered Independent and have always been. I am also 47 years old.
I am far from a “Party bot”
Sarah Palin IS Reagan. You vote third party on your self righteousness and she is spun into oblivion. She will never be POTUS that way.
And you can count yourself proud that YOU caused that, if you vote for a guaranteed loser third party candidate. Me, I vote for Sarah. McCain is the opening act we sit through to get her.
Pity the PUMAs have more sense than some on FR.
The rest of the GOP POTUS since JFK beginning with Nixon, Ford, Bush Sr, and Bush Junior have been putting the same policy making failures faces and names in key positions & expecting different results. Note that few if any were Reagan's people during this time. Did you ever stop and wonder why? The controllers of the current GOP are called Liberals or Rockefeller Republicans.
There has been an internal fight going on for the party for decades since the days of Nelson Rockefeller actually. This fight has recently cost the GOP a sitting majority in two houses. If people want Liberals they'll vote DEM. If DEM's however want Conservatives they will cross over. The GOP was elected on a Conservative agenda in 1994. By 1996 the Conservative agenda was abandoned and leadership had been removed from power within the party. The result being the Rockefeller's took over. No greater evidence needs to be produced than the running out of office of Newt {his own fault as well} and the key speakers at the 1996 GOP Convention who made nearly every conservative in the GOP want to hurl in absolute disgust. They helped cost Dole an election. Remember them?
Palin under the current GOP hierarchy will not last and you can take it to the bank. Time for the GOP to be replaced as it can not be fixed.
Let me put it another way. If Palin’s name were on top of the ticket today the GOP would have my vote. However Palin will likely never cast a tie breaker nor be directly involved in policy. Sad but true.
Vote for anyone but McCain and you get Obama. In the meantime the GOP will blame the loss on the conservative. And maroons like you who know better than EVERYONE else, will will make that happen. Double loss for you.
DeMint is working to elect Conservatives. Instead of wasting your time here trying to get someone to say, “Oh yeah you're right!”, like a highschool girl in the lunchroom, go to his site and do something.
But at this point, the owner of this site has given you all the reasons you must vote for McCain. Talk to Jim.
And Darlin' I worked too long with patients needing treatment for Narcissistic Personality Disorder to treat you for free. There are meds for this, you should check them out. Ask your provider for a script
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.