[Mr Rogers]

I support the rightward most candidate who is viable.

But a republican congress can and will successfully oppose a democrat. They cannot win a fight with a republican president who, on domestic policy, seems somewhere left of Bill Clinton. So why not vote for a republican congress, and write in "Joe Conservative" for President?

If GWB lost a close election because 500,000 people voted for "Joe Conservative", while republicans in Congress won - we would see more conservative government & the next republican President would NEVER! say, "Who else can they vote for?"

The very fact they are asking questions like that reveals they care NOTHING for principle.

[beckysueb]

Where you going to find a conservative Republican in Congress to vote for? LOL

[Owen]

>

But a republican congress can and will successfully oppose a democrat. They cannot win a fight with a republican president who, on domestic policy, seems somewhere left of Bill Clinton. So why not vote for a republican congress, and write in "Joe Conservative" for President?

>

Why? Because extremists are absolutely, ABSOLUTELY obligated to be consistent. That is the basis of rational thought.

Extremists have been saying for . . . over a year that the republicans in the Senate have no guts. They say the Senate GOP is devoid of all courage. The GOP Senate won't do the awkward and uncomfortable things needed to defend conservatism.

Given that as true (whether or not it is does not matter, what matters is the unalterable obligation to be consistent), then you CAN NOT expect the GOP Senate (assuming we retain control of such a narrowly divided chamber) to oppose stealth Pro Choice USSC nominees. They won't oppose. The nominees will be stealthy, will cleverly refuse to answer any direct questions on the subject, and the GOP Senate, being gutless, will have the necessary cover it needs to roll over and acquiesce.

If you vote against Bush or stay home, you vote to kill unborn babies. Go look in the mirror the next day, if you can.