Replies

So electing big government Republicans is practical? In Washington's case he was practical enough to SACRIFICE his career to end an over bearing government. Too bad many sacrifice basic conservative principals so they can get moderates elected.

Buchanan is a nut, isolationist I am not. I await your next smear.

Harris is a moderate. Single issue my behind. Look here and see all her innuendos for collectivism.

http://www.electharris.org/issues/

And the GOP spends like crazy which enhances an even bigger bureaucracy.

By the way, are those tax cuts permanent yet? What about curbing big government? "But those mean democrats are filibustering". Why hasn't Frist brought the mattresses out? Afraid those votes for benefits might dry up?

So electing big government Republicans is practical?

I never said that but thanks for admitting that you were wrong about the founding fathers.

Too bad many sacrifice basic conservative principals so they can get moderates elected.

I guess they were never conservative in the first place. Kind of like freepers who claim they might vote for a ultra-liberal horses butt like Nelson instead of the republican candidate.

Buchanan is a nut, isolationist I am not.

Yes he is but even Pat wouldn't vote for a slug like Neslon. You might.

Harris is a moderate.

Sure. I guess that's why the ACU gave her a rating of "92" in 2004. Bill Nelson, on the other hand, received a whopping "4" from the ACU.

And you might vote for this guy?

By the way, are those tax cuts permanent yet? What about curbing big government? "But those mean democrats are filibustering". Why hasn't Frist brought the mattresses out? Afraid those votes for benefits might dry up?

And an ultra-liberal (more liberal than Hillary) will deliver on these issues for conservatives better than Harris? That's pretty nutty. But you go ahead and wring your hands over who to vote for. I know it must be hard for you to tell the difference between "4" and "92".

Good luck with that third party.