Posted on 09/02/2006 9:41:18 AM PDT by ashamedtobefromparkridge
Some sensitive democrat supporters got my previous post pulled and I admit I went overboard but I am just so angry at how ridiculous some people get.
The whole Idea that because the republicans haven't done everything you want you want them out and want the democrats in TO SEND A MESSAGE.
The only message it sends is you want Bush impeached or at least a long costly trial that will weaken the US in the world and embolden the terrorists.
You want a much better chance at much higher taxes.
You want a very good chance we cut and run from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Tell me these things won't happen if the dems take over and since when do conservatives want cut and run and higher taxes?
And why do you want the terrorists emboldened by a weakened Bush?
Yes he hasn't been perfect but the alternative is much worse.
The Republican congress under Bush has been both good and bad for conservatives.
But the dems would make it 100 percent bad.
I agree on Bush's immigration bill. But it's much better than anything the dems want and if the dems win that's what will happen.
And another point if a vacancy happens in the SC right now at worst we'd get a middle of the road person if the dems win they'd make the most liberal justice look like Rush in comparison.
Vote republican even if you have to hold your nose and work at getting better candidates in 08.
If you truly believe the dem you'd vote for is better you're probably misled at best but vote for him/her.
But just to send a message don't do it.
It took the dems 12 years to take control if they do in 06. Do you want to wait that long to take control back?
I've been disappointed in Bush myself. But when I think of the alternative I get nightmares literally.
The dems will go for impeachment, higher taxes, cut and run and no immigration laws. They may not get them but its certainly much more likely to happen.
A vote against the republicans either for a dem or in default by not voting period is a vote against anything happening good for the conservative movement.
Maybe I'm different because I'm not 100 percent conservative. Some of my views lean a bit liberal (the biggest is while I'm anti gay marriage I am pro civil unions. By the way many gays agree with me on that including my gay republican cousin). But I'd rather vote for a rep willing to make some compromises than any democrat.
We're never going to get eveyrthing we want. But we're going to get what we have taken away and definitely not anything more with a democrat congress.
And believe me I will need a barf bag and nose clips to vote for Judy Barr Topinka in November. I think I should have an ambulance at the ready in case.
This is the first governor or presidential race I haven't put time into since I was 8 years old. I even go back to before I was able to vote to Ford in 1976 helping stuff envelopes at 8 years old.
Heck I've even voted for a democrat or too WHEN HE WAS THE BETTER CANDIDATE! Not to send a message but because he was the better candidate.
And for those who think I'm a DU in disguise. Read my post history.
Or why the heck do you think I'm ashamed to be from Park Ridge? Dave Butts the Washington Redskins star? No her name rhymes with Sillary Flinton.
.....Dissension leads to strength, blind voting to weakness......
I fully agree that dessention, even strong dessention is necessary. That is why we have primaries. The primaries allows dissention and an airing of all views.
Moderation for moderation's sake serves no good purpose. However to dispense with the primary elected candidate because he lacks some sort of purity will assure disaster and the election of someone who is truly bad.
I can blame you and the others showing this attitude for the election of Bill Clinton. Ross Perot appealed to just enough purists to cause Clinton to be elected.
The next time you throw away a vote on a nonelectable candidate or don't vote because of principle.... think of Bill Clinton.
Please look at my post 122.
Do I have to?
I call, I write... I get lip service and form letters.
I send back envelopes (that used to hold donations) with a long letter about why I've stopped donating.
My message is: change your ways, and I'll support you. Keep on with your RINO betrayals, and I won't. I won't send money, I won't vote for you.
In order for this message to really have impact, I need to mean what I say.
You think clintoon could have done that? Nah. It took a republican.
"Let all of the poisons that lurk in the mud, hatch out." I CLAVDIVS
You should read this
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1634250/posts
Term Limits and Challenging the Establishment in the Primaries.
Agreed. Analytical minds think alike.
How long did you look at it to see if you could find a pattern?
Wow. That's funny. I've been blaming you and the others for not voting for Ross.
How ironic, don't ya think?
This thread needs more cowbell.
Since by staying home or voting dem your voting for higher taxes, cut and run and impeachment why do you care?
Everyone who goes along with this stay home thing or vote dem to show a lesson is worse than the worse democrat.
With Respect, read your own Tag Line.
So your going to show yourself as a fraud conservative and vote to get the democrats in power?
Why do you hate our troops so much? why do you want to pay higher taxes?
Foul- logical fallacy. Ten yard penalty and loss of a down.
So your going to show yourself as a fraud conservative and vote to get the democrats in power?
A fraud conservative would have us "hold our noses" while we vote RINO.
APf
Dear P-40,
Mr. Perot ran in both 1992 and 1996, although he didn't do as well in 1996, gaining only around 8% of the vote. Still, Mr. Clinton did not receive a majority of the popular vote that year, gaining only about 49%.
sitetest
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.