The Pennsylvania Treason

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | May 1, 2004 | Mark Crutcher

[Tamzee]

Funny thing is they claim they will never "sell out" by voting for so-and-so because of such-and-such value or endorsement or vote...

If voting for someone because they have an opinion you disagree with is "selling out" then technically every vote is some varying degree of "selling out" unless you write yourself in.

They can't even pretend to share all the values of Toomey because Toomey just endorsed Specter, yet they don't want to "sell out" and vote for Specter so they'll write in Toomey???

[Polycarp IV]

Spectre borked Bork. I'm not sure when or who his last victim was.

Spectre is 100% radical pro-abort, except when he's up for re election.

Thanks for posting the excerpt from humaneventsonline.com. That offers some hope in a dismal situation.

[Polycarp IV]

yet they don't want to "sell out" and vote for Specter so

I have never voted for Spectre. So how are you going to malign and insult me now?

[nopardons]

That was one of THE best pieces of logic,ever to grace FR.

And to put the icing on the cake,you managed to really nail them but good. :-)

[Polycarp IV]

WHINGE is also used by Americans and is pretty common on FR.

Baloney. Just for the heck of it, I did a little scut work. Its been used, in both the WHINGE and WHINGing form, a total of 3 times in the last 2 years on this Forum, one of those instances by you in 2002.

Your claims on colloquialisms are no more valid that your claims on this thread in general.

[Consort]

Voting for a Democrat, pro-life or otherwise, empowers the pro-choice Dems, and if the Dems take control, then pro-choice (not pro-life) Dems will chair the committees. Voting third party also helps the Democrats.

[Tamzee]

Try consulting a dictionary before being tempted to show off that blazing intellect of yours.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=whinge&r=67

2 entries found for whinge.
whinge ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hwnj, wnj)
intr.v. Chiefly British whinged, whing·ing, whing·es
To complain or protest, especially in an annoying or persistent manner.

[Tamzee]

Whoops, sorry, didn't mean to go all logical in the midst of a carnival mirror thread...

Thanks ;-)

[Polycarp IV]

Try following the debate prior to engaging that patronizing keyboard of yours. My point was that the term is not a common colloquialism on FR.

[Tamzee]

I've seen it a number of times... you also questioned nopardons general spelling initially, in a "patronizing" fashion yet.

Regardless... Specter's lifetime ACU rating is 45, he is a centrist who votes with us about half the time. Hoeffel's lifetime ACU rating is 8 and Hillary's is 11.

Any "conservative" that sits quietly by and welcomes in a new Senator even more leftist than Hillary out of some perverse "principle" is a moron.

[Polycarp IV]

Any "conservative" that sits quietly by and welcomes in a new Senator even more leftist than Hillary out of some perverse "principle" is a moron.

Pro-life is not "some perverse principle," moron.

"LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Notice LIFE comes first?

If you can't get it right on LIFE, you can't be expected to get it right on anything.

I'll vote in December, but I won't vote for PA Senator unless there is a pro-life third party candidate. Does that make me a "moron"? In your small mind, maybe. But I'm not too concerned about what you "think."

[Tamzee]

Past my bedtime, folks, goodnight and sweet dreams whichever way your vote swings :-)

[Toddsterpatriot]

What happened to Borin' Orrin? Is he retiring?

Republicans term-limit their Chairmen. He'll still be on the comittee, probably.

[ninenot]

Borin' Orrin has his own troubles, just beginning now. Apparently some sort of conflict of interest thing.

Besides which, he's a jerk.

[annalex]

You are right, except the litmus test I'd like to see is, vote GOP if the GOP candidate shows pro-life work. Not "is" pro-life, because that means next to nothing. Otherwise vote third party.

As far as conservatives (and libertarians) are concerned, establishment GOP is enemy territory, along with the Dems, of course. The GOP can be redeemed, but only the present turncoat class in Washington is beaten, and beaten bad.

[victim soul]

DITTO:

"The GOP pols should know that unless there is tangible legislative progress in the rights of the unborn, the conservatives will support third parties regardless of the consequences for the GOP."

[annalex]

Implicit in your graphical comment is the notion that religious conservatives are cranky babies that should be plugged with pacifiers. That insulting notion indeed exists in the Republican party. The truth is that while a baby depends on the parent throughout, the conservatives depend on the GOP only as long as the GOP delivers real food. But the GOP depends on the conservatives if it wants to win elections. Next time you feel the urge to display arrogance, reflect on where the GOP derives its power.

[TOUGH STOUGH]

As much as I despise Bush and Santorum's betrayal of Toomey, Toomey isn't broke. He has his wife, children and probably other supportive members of his family, a means to earn a decent living, and many loyal grassroots supporters who will be willing to work for him for another elective office like governor after his excellent run against Specter. I am more concerned with the ramifications of Specter's victory regarding conservative and pro-life issues, and even more importantly the state of the nation.

It is clear that like the democrats, there are many on this board who place the Republican party above the good of the nation. Some on this forum are capable of inflicting far greater cruelty and damage to their fellows than are Republican Pols. When they stand before almighty God, they are going to be surprised to learn that God is not going to excuse their visciousness because it was done in the name of politics. Neither is God going to forgive those who are aware of the evil their fellows propagate, and choose to do nothing.

[Tamzee]

There is quite a bit that could be gleaned from my graphic other than that narrow and nuanced interpretation you prefer. Conservatives are just as reliant on the GOP to see that our agenda get some legs at all and I'm sick of other conservatives throwing a wrench into the works because they refuse to understand we are a MINORITY. We make up LESS THAN HALF of the electorate and as such we need to work with moderates and accept that we won't get everything we want. Thank GOD the Greens are a minority and can't get everything they want... it works the same with us, unfortunately, until we educate enough of the public to BECOME a majority.

We're damn lucky to have Santorum, we certainly aren't automatically entitled to him given how we are outnumbered by the liberals and moderates in Pennsylvania. Moderates helped us put him in office and we need to continue to stick together on both conservative and centrist Repubicans.

[annalex]

You've given me a stock response, that doesn't apply to situations when the conservative agenda is damaged unnecessarily. The article explains quite clearly that Bush and Santorum's endorsement of Spectre was not brought about by any reasonable political horse trading, but by a deliberate desire to hold the religious conservatives in check. If you really have a point about political realities, try to make it in the context of this excellent article, and hold the cute graphics.

Taking a broader look, we of course understand the necessity to compromise, but a compromise is useful only if it advances the agenda. Pro-life agenda did not advance under the GOP. Matter of fact, I am not aware of any conservative plank that has advanced, despite the congressional majorities and the control of the White house.