[loreldan]

I’m not sure that having an anarchist endorse McCain helps his cause, but maybe that’s the point?

[KansasGirl]

I agree. At least McCain is a war hero. At least he’s got some issues right. Obama is wrong on everything, and is an America-hating scumbag. He is arrogant enough to think he can fool Americans with his charm all the while despising them.

[secretagent]

Forget about candidates, and organize around issues and ideas.

Politicians just say whatever they think will get them elected.

The strategy is to popularize ideas of liberty, so politicians will spout those ideas to get elected.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

You’re less anarchist than you seem to think.

But choosing to not enforce laws is not Libertarian, it’s Libertine.

Not a good idea without a moral people.

[Nervous Tick]

Wow, that may be the most sensible and intelligent newbie vanity I’ve read here.

See my tagline; I think it succinctly sums up what you’re suggesting.

[buck jarret]

The Republicans are already ruining us. If the Democrats can be even worse, we’ll soon find out.

[Finny]

I think that was a great post. So many excellent points:

-- Leftist programs are nearly impossible to dismantle, logistically and electorally! Your programs can be undone in a heartbeat! The war on drugs could be ended in a week.

-- A welfare system creates more poverty and more voters who want a welfare system, which in turn leads to an expansion of the welfare system, which leads to more poverty and more voters who want a welfare system, etc.

-- We can't afford any moment where a leftist is in control of us; they'll milk it for all it's worth, setting up programs that we'll never be able to undo.

This is where our working definitions of Liberal and Conservative come in. Lefists are practicioners of liberalism to the extreme. The problem isn't leftists; it's the LIBERALISM they embrace. McCain is a Republican. He is also a Liberal. All of those issues above; try global warming, acceptance of the concept of "nationalized" (what a euphemism) medicine, forced social acceptance of homosexuality at the muzzle of Federal regulation -- he's a liberal, and liberals do things like enact welfare programs, nominate liberal judges, etc. He's a "government is our solution" Republican, and "Government is our solution" is the antithesis of conservatism. He seeks the U.S. presidency. If that's a Republican, I ain't one.

We know that "if you're 20 and you're a conservative, you have no heart; if you're 50 and a liberal you have no brain." That is where a lot of coservative voters come from. They want less government, that's what they want to vote for because as they get older and wiser, they realize that it's in their best moral and personal interest.

When the Republican party manifests the Perfect Storm that is McCain, then future voters are left high and dry. They have no party to vote for. The damage to the Republican party would be tremendous. It's not about McCain, it's about LIBERALISM. When you ask me to vote for McCain, you're asking me to endorse Liberalism as a good calculated risk because McCain carries the Republican name and that should count for something, right?

Not any more. Now it stands for the Big Daddy brand of big government Liberalism, instead of the Mommy brand that Democrats offer.

McCain's VP choice will be key for me, and I'm not holding my breath. If that VP is someone like Romney, whose Massachusetts government health care plan is now really starting to hurt, there's a high probability that a McCain victory would do more damage for sabotaging the Repulican identity of conservatism, the fount of future voters. I fear Obama and Hillary less because of another risk I'm willing to take: I think they'd become pariahs quickly. They're divisive, flawed, and weak -- their popular support is illusion, and they'd be fought from many sides through, I'm gambling, a rocky four-year presidency. Republicans would gain in Congress and the image of the Democrat party would be in shambles. I am also mindful that if McCain wins, it's the Republican party that would be in shambles.

To have that in the White House would be weatherable and horrible -- for the U.S. and especially for the Democrat party if Obama or Hillary win. The Democrat party bears the principles and identy of Liberalism. Liberalism is the cause of our ills, NOT the Democrat party. LIBERALISM. McCain may not be a Democrat, but he's a Liberal captaining the Republican ship into Liberal shoals.

Did you really mean:
While abstaining from voting for McCain will certainly send a message, I can assure you as a libertarian that sending messages is tremendously overrated.

Understand that "sending a message" is off my radar. This is a ship asail heading for a reef and its sails need to be changed now. To refrain from supporting McCain and risking the outcome as the least destructive is a calculated gamble, an attempt to change the set of the sails of the Republican party. There is no "message," only the excercise of power to direct outcomes.

[festus]

I’m not sure how you differentiate between McCain and the leftists.................

That said I’ll vote to oppose Hillary or Obama even if it means I have to vote for that lying leftist McCain.

[Grunthor]

“From an anarcho-capitalist: Please Support McCain!”

No. If yer lucky I MIGHT vote against Obama IF McBackstabbers’ VP is a conservative.

[GregH]

Good post, on the issue of fiscal conservatism alone Mccain is streets ahead of the rest and that includes the other Republican contendors. I have no issue is supporting McCain 100% for the Presidency.

[Just mythoughts]

First off the only thing that will limit any of these three candidates from launching more taxation and their own ‘I am’ agenda is a conservative Congress. I am not sure there are really enough conservatives left in this nation to even run let alone get elected.

I find it to be at the least disingenuous of lord McCain to be bashing Obama for being elitist after taking inventory of lord McCain's legislative agenda.