[ohioWfan]

That isn't what I said, and you know it.

I didn't say you were FOR Kerry, but the reality is (whether you think it's repetitive or not), that there are only TWO choices in November.

That's it. No one else can win.

If your 'purism' makes you so strongly opposed to Bush, and you don't vote for him, you will be de facto, supporting Kerry.

If you really ARE a conservative (and not just a DU troll stirring up trouble), then the thought of Kerry in the White House nauseates you. The thought of handing this country back to the left scares you to death.

But you're so busy calling other conservative 'leftists' that it doesn't seem likely that you even know what a leftist really is.......... it's certainly NOT the people you've lambasted on this forum.

[OWK]

I didn't say you were FOR Kerry...

No... you only implied it.

(is this what passes for honesty in your camp?)

[OWK]

If you really ARE a conservative (and not just a DU troll stirring up trouble)

Jinkies! You're on to me Velma.

I started on FR in 97. Wore a red hat at the March for Justice, personally met just about everyone on FR at the time, have been a consistent and unwavering defender of my principles on this website for 7 or 8 years... and it was all so I could establish a deep cover as a DU troll operative, and spring a trap on you dupes in this very thread making you all look like fools trying to defend a leftist.

And I'd have gotten away with it too.. if it wasn't for you meddling kids.

You're just too smart for me.

[Sabertooth]

If your 'purism' makes you so strongly opposed to Bush, and you don't vote for him, you will be de facto, supporting Kerry.

While we're talking de facto, let me ask you a question:

Are the Bush advisors who advocated Amnesty, CFR, big spending, etc., all of which may end up costing more votes than they gain in November, "de facto, supporting Kerry?"

Are the Bush stalwarts in this forum who've resisted criticizing this President the past few years, and, to the extent that FR has influence, encouraged the notion that the White House can take votes for granted and squander them, "de facto, supporting Kerry?"

If the consequences of an action benefit Kerry's electoral prospects, is the person behind it "de facto, supporting Kerry?"