Posted on 10/18/2006 9:03:11 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
Not yet, but which party has pushed homosexual rights for fifty years?
The other night I heard Beck say - and I'm paraphrasing here - "vote for the man, not the party" and "Vote for the best canidate - be they Republican OR Democrat". Now I can think of only 2 instances where that nonsense might apply - a vote for Joe Lieberman or Zel Miller.
Would you rather have a whole bunch of kerry clones than ONE Specter?
The only difference between the dim running for Senate in Montana and kerry as far as morals, policies and tactics is that "our" East Coast Liberal wears his hair in a flattop.
They certainly are. I try to resist talking to them, since it's a waste of time. Instead I work on the few liberal friends I have who are too intelligent to permanently resist my logic.
I don't even want to think about what might happen if we dont win, bad bad bad.
He understands, it is you that is not listening. You can't win and impliment ideas if you are out of power.
You think you will get your ideas with Dems in charge? No, you will not. Will you still have your values promoted with Dems in charge? No, you will not. Do you think borders will be more secure with Dems in charge? No, you will not. Do you think we will still have tax cuts with Dems in charge? No, you will not. Do you think we will support the troops with Dems in charge? No, you will not.
I could go on, but the 'stay at home conservatives' cabal are screaming to become sore losers and whiners in November. Principals are worthless by being a loser.
Yep, like Maha Rushie has always said: good news for the US is bad news for Dims AND bad news for the US is good news for Dims.
If you listened everyday, you would know you are wrong.
Sure. I used to watch him, until I realized, "I like what he is saying about BJC, but why is he speaking nicely to this pro-death abortion rights idiot?"
Once they get their power back they will not under ANY circumstances allow events, laws, government agencies (anything which they can remotely control) that has the potential to hurt them in the elections. Look for Congress-assisted voter fraud, government agency facilitation of voter fraud, IRS investigation of virtually every RNC affiliated group, indictment of problem PUBs, or anything else to which they can usurp and claim control by virtue of being the majority.
What's that? You say George Bush can veto anything like that? Don't be too sure. He will be too busy fending off impeachment attacks and trying to save the IRAQ situation (because the DEMs will have de-funded it). And, any semblance of strong Republicanism in the leftover Pubbie ranks in Congress will be cowering for cover from the "Foley-like" investigations or other Majority-controlled actions which will ensue.
You just don't understand to what lengths Democrats will go to get and retain control, no understanding at all.....
And earlier today, the DOW passed 12,000 and was up over 100 points, at 12,049, highest ever. Wonder how little that will be talked about in the news. If voters vote their personal situation, and not supposedly how bad annonymous people say the economy is, the Republicans would win a landslide. In all ways, the economy today is MUCH stronger then it was in the 90s. Lower unemployment, higher revenues, lower inflation, and no cooked corporate books, no dot com bubble, and no hanky panky in the economy in general. Anyone who says the economy was great in the 90s but stinks today is a liberal hack and doesn't understand even basic economics.
TexasPatriot, Check out the PA board sometime, sadly, they're here.
And McCain in 08 would be a complete nightmare
Yes and he would lose. I hear there is a file on him that the left is holding back for just such an eventuality. He got a taste of it when one of Hildibag's handmaidens made a crack about his VN service. (She of course, knew nothing but apologized.)
Plenty more where that came from.
There is a boat load of them! It stems from here!
This Rush talk today reminds me of the day he said "This is a crack down, not a crack up." It was relating to the Meirs debate at the time.
It was also one of the two times in the past few years that I disagreed with Rush. It was a sign that things were going to crack up, as I saw it then. Rush did not see it. he was wrong.(seldom happens though)
But I'm glad he is addressing it now.
Very well put!
You're right - it doesn't exist. Rush was one of the main reasons Bush won the nomination over McCrazy, and for that I am eternally grateful. He will also oppose him in the '08 primaries.
However, that has nothing to do with the point I made, and I think you know it.
If, somehow, McCain is the GOP nominee for President in 2008, Rush and the rest of the GOP-first types will support him without reservation - simply because he is the LOTE with the Beast.
Personally, I'm voting straight ticket Pubbie this year, because there are still two more years to enact conservative legislation.
I believe McCain will be shoved down our throats in '08 - in the view of the GOP party people, it is his turn (like Dole in '96).
For the record - I will never, ever, under any circumstances, vote for McCain - regardless of how much invective the GOP kool-aid drinkers spew.
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.