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.
The rest of your Post 420: However, I want to emphasize that these situations are very, very few and far between, and in no way should the majority ever be sacrificed to send a message to the RINOs and/or eliminate one bad apple.
Ah yes. Compromise. No. They are the norm. Rinos outnumber solid Americans that are NOT Socialist/Communist. That's why Obama is winning. Voters like you, that compromise principle, are giving him the weak links with no spine.
Your Post 425: You do what you think is best. I’ll do what I think is best. I only hope that very few join you. You seem to have decided the only way to win is to not play. To me, that sounds an awful lot like losing.
We’ve had this discussion many times in the past, and I’m not going to go back over it all again. 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.
A Rino filled Senate IS a Dem filled Senate. Again, you'll compromise simply because the liberal has an "R" after their name. And the left will blame Republicans for the destruction because people like you filled the Senate with Rinos instead of letting the Dems do their own dirty work. Obama wins either way and you compromise your principles again.
Your Poost 450 :I agree a pro-abort would be a tough call, but it’s a call you have to make if both candidates are pro-aborts. I’m vilified (by some FReepers) for saying this, but it’s not black and white.
There are different levels of pro-aborts. Perhaps the opponent supports government funded abortion on demand at any time for any reason. Most Democrats do. A Republican that is generally pro-abort but supports restrictions is better.
More compromise. The lesser of two evils is still evil. Your way is exactly how we got where we are. Aren't you so proud? A conservative that's willing to be played by those in power and compromise their principles is not a real conservative. They vote out of fear, not knowledge and conviction. And they have brought our country to the brink of destruction. Congratulations.
I am not lying.
It is your post, and it is a direct quote.
I even gave links.
Too bad for you.
Perhaps if you asked the mod to remove your posts you can claim you never said what was quoted!
Some people have tried that you know.