'W' – the only realistic choice for conservatives

WND ^

[af_vet_1981]

I'm not holier than anybody here.

• I know you are not.
• You just think you are.
• You are here to hand terrorists a victory.
• That is your only agenda on FR.

[NittanyLion]

You are here to hand terrorists a victory.

That's totally inappropriate.

[af_vet_1981]

It is "totally innappropriate" to hand the terrorists a victory this November. Don't do it.

[NittanyLion]

It is "totally innappropriate" to hand the terrorists a victory this November. Don't do it.

Don't be a nitwit. Accusing someone of handing the terrorists victory because they're voting for their principles is beyond the pale. If you can't recognize that, it reveals more about your critical thinking skills than anyone else's patriotism.

[MarcoPolo]

Sigh. I'm used to people calling me names or making accusations against me for my stances. Well if it makes you feel better, go ahead. It's not hurting me.

[af_vet_1981]

It's not hurting me.

I know. It's all about you. You don't give a whit about this country. You will undermine the last vestige of moral, normal rule so we can have even more chaos. You can't even support a decent man trying to fight for what's left of this country's moral values. Your principles would have kept us out of WWII because the Russians were in it.

[af_vet_1981]

Pretending to be a conservative and voting for the terrorists' choice is beyond the pale. Osama will be proud of you. You can recite your shehada now.

[The Green Goblin]

Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian candidate, loops around in some universe of his own, in favor of disengaging the Federal government from all but its stated powers as enumerated in the Constitution, and pretty much permitting everything else that is not prohibited.

Yeah, he's really nutty for advocating the principles established by the Founders of this country, isn't he?

Flitter off, comrade...

[Moonman62]

You throw around your self-defined terms like "business spending crisis" as opposed to "consumer spending recession" as if there is some humunguous difference.

Recessions are measured in an arbitrary way using consumer spending. That's probably because only two recessions were led by business spending declines. The most recent recession and the recession that led to the Great Depression. If it weren't for 911 which caused Greenspan to end his personal war against the economy, we may have had a second Great Depression.

[alloysteel]

It is one thing to be in favor of limiting government to no more than what is a strict interpretation of what is in the Constitution, and another thing entirely to get this admittedly skimpy framework to cover every situation that arises between human beings in daily commerce. Supposedly, that is what the judiciary is charged with doing, to determine the specific application from the general overview.

Well, we all know how well that works. Look at all the new "rights" that have been discerned in the Constitution in only the past fifty years (from the Warren Court forward). New freedoms have been found, and old prohibitions have been demolished. All based on some vague language, that relates to daily life only because some pencil-necked geek on a university campus somwhere thought it may reflect on some isolated clan somewhere in Appalachia. And he wanted to be sure he got his daily fix of marijuana.