To: Antoninus
Well, thanks for your help getting that moonbat Menendez out of the Senate. Not to mention that the Dems think they can take back the Senate, and it would be priceless to see them lose a seat in a blue state of all places. "Principles", right?
You know, social conservatives are funny people. They seem to think they own the GOP. I'm a moderate on social issues, but have no problem voting for a social conservative if they're good on other issues. For example, I supported Tim Pawlenty in Minnesota, and would've supported Schundler in NJ had I lived here then. But you ask a social conservative who purports to also be an economic conservative to support a strong conservative who's a bit more moderate on some social issues, they tell you to go screw yourself. What gives?
To: MinnesotaLibertarian
I'm a moderate on social issues, but have no problem voting for a social conservative if they're good on other issues.
That's because the social issues don't mean that much to you. If social issues are a make-or-break thing for you, like they are for me, then it makes a huge difference in who you vote for.
But you ask a social conservative who purports to also be an economic conservative to support a strong conservative who's a bit more moderate on some social issues,
Doug Forrester was "a bit more moderate" on social issues and I held my nose and voted for him. Kean the Less is a liberal and a doctrinaire pro-abort. I don't vote for liberals and his abortion position makes him utterly anathema.
they tell you to go screw yourself. What gives?
Hey, I'll at least do Kean the Less the courtesy of not openly supporting his Democrat opponent. The same could not be said for those oh so noble moderate "Republicans" who came out for McGreevey against Schundler in 2001.
31 posted on
08/31/2006 10:19:38 AM PDT by
Antoninus
(I don't vote for liberals, regardless of party.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson