Post 420 “ If that means I gotta elect a RINO incumbent, I’m going to do it with no regrets. We’re past the time—the primaries—to put better conservatives in these seats. Now I’m gonna vote for the best of the two remaining options, and it sure isn’t going to be a vote for a Democrat!”
So you will vote for a proabort, and the RINOs can count on you no matter what.
“Let the lurkers decide for themselves what is best: a Democrat-controlled senate or a Republican one. That’s really the only two choices at this point, because the senate is going to be filled regardless.”
post 425, “only two choices”.
Vote for the liberal RINO, or the democrat is what you are implying there.
“Don’t forget. Senators are there for six very long years. Pick the course that best serves your cause or at least does the least amount of damage.”
Post 450: Choose the lesser evil, because it’s not that evil!
Again, your tagline: (Proverbs 14:34 Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.)
And again, Romans 12:2 “Be not conformed to this world”
Tell me, how does your tagline and your outward proclamation of scripture, and what scripture says in Romans square with your “Choose the .01% cyanide arsenic chaser” position?
“So you will vote for a proabort, and the RINOs can count on you no matter what.”
Actually, that mischaracterizes what I wrote. I said there were some rare cases where I’d vote against the RINO (in the general election only—I vote most conservative in primaries), like where they might do more damage than a newbie Democrat. Mitch McConnell comes to mind.
Post #420. You lie. You claim the RINOs can count on me no matter what, but I specifically wrote, “In some very small number of cases, that might mean sacrificing a Republican in Name Only (RINO) who does serious damage (more than the Democrat) to the conservative cause.” I just wrote it might be better to eliminate a RINO. That is not “NO MATTER WHAT.”
Post #425. You lie. “Only two choices in the general election” is what I actually wrote. You completely dropped the part about “general election” and voting against RINOs in primaries. My statement, “pick the course that best serves your cause” when read in light of post #420 implies that course can even mean voting against the RINO if the RINO is worse than the Democrat or likely to harm the conservative cause.
Post #450. You lie. The words, “Choose the lesser evil, because it’s not that evil!” were never implied or written by me (until just now). I never, ever stated that RINOs aren’t that evil. Some clearly are.
This is getting tiring. You keep misrepresenting what I post and I keep trying to defend myself. It’s hopeless. You are either intentionally misrepresenting what I write or you’re blinded to it. Restating what I actually posted over and over is getting us nowhere. FReegards.