Posted on 01/21/2008 4:16:25 PM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
They’re out there. Pence comes to my mind right off of the bat.
All you have to do is look.
-————You will notice the difference on the WOT and on who gets nominated for the Supreme Court.-————
No you won’t. There’s quite a bit of both anecdotal as well as actual evidence that McCain won’t nominate constitutionalist judges to the SCOTUS.
And nobody’s gonna pull us out of Iraq. Nobody wants “defeat” as part of their legacy. Even the media isn’t powerful enough to cover that one up. Pullout would = defacto defeat. Obama doesn’t want defeat as his legacy. Hillary doesn’t want it as hers. The current congress could’ve pulled us out over a year ago, but didn’t. This should tell everybody, especially a freeper who pays attention, that all this is is political posturing. If they could saddle bush with a defeat, great. But they don’t want it on their dole.
And it doesn’t matter who wins; McCain, Obama, or Hillary. Gitmo terrorists are already guaranteed constitutional rights. So there’s no difference.
pingeroo!
lolol
: )
Neither is/was GWB, Dole, GHWB, Ford, or Nixon. The GOP nominating far-less-than conservative candidates is nothing new.
No you won’t. There’s quite a bit of both anecdotal as well as actual evidence that McCain won’t nominate constitutionalist judges to the SCOTUS. And nobody’s gonna pull us out of Iraq. Nobody wants “defeat” as part of their legacy. Even the media isn’t powerful enough to cover that one up. Pullout would = defacto defeat. Obama doesn’t want defeat as his legacy. Hillary doesn’t want it as hers. The current congress could’ve pulled us out over a year ago, but didn’t. This should tell everybody, especially a freeper who pays attention, that all this is is political posturing. If they could saddle bush with a defeat, great. But they don’t want it on their dole. And it doesn’t matter who wins; McCain, Obama, or Hillary. Gitmo terrorists are already guaranteed constitutional rights. So there’s no difference.
First, no Democratic President is going to be able to stay in Iraq and get reelected.
What blocked the Democratic Congress was Bush's determination.
Second, if you think there is no difference between McCain and the Democrats then you shouldn't vote.
But McCain is far better then any Democrat in many areas, such as pro-life, national defense and spending.
So you think Pence is going to be the next Reagan?
Even Reagan couldn't pass the litmus tests that many Conservatives have today!
Well, Bush signed McCain-Feingold and supported McCain-Kennedy!
At the same time, McCain's political history is that he's disloyal, opportunistic and, thus, untrustworthy. So, when he claims that he will do conservative things, should we believe him? More likely, he'll "reach out" to the Democrats, just like he always has...and enact liberal legislation. Just like Hillary and Obama would've done. He says he will appoint strict constructionist judges. But such judges would, in all liklihood, rule that McCain-Feingold is an unconstitutional infringement on our First Amendment rights. So, would McCain really do that to what he considers his signature piece of legislation?
I think he has admitted that he erred in pushing it.
What I'll do on Election Day isn't set in stone. With almost nine months to go, it doesn't have to be. I'm not inclined to want Hillary or Obama in the White House. But I'm not inclined to want John McCain there, either.
He isn't my first choice, or second choice, or third choice either!
But Obama or Hillary are totally unacceptable.
McCain has 8-plus months to convince me otherwise. I'm not giving him my support without his having earned it.
Well, the reality is that we have an election process in the GOP.
If each of us sit out the election because our guy didn't win, the Party will cease to exist.
We critize RINO's when they refuse to support conservatives.
The reality is that McCain is going to be what he is, he isn't going to change.
Neither is the reality that it is him or Hillary/Obama.
Nothing could be worse then that!
Sure, and you have all the answers. Right. I will make sure to ping you next time I need all the facts and the correct facts, according to you.
Did I say Bush was a conservative?
I think he has admitted that he erred in pushing [McCain-Feingold]
Has he now? I was unaware of that. Hmmmmmmm, has he offered to withdraw the legislation....???
As I indicated, I'm open minded. In the end, I imagine I will probably end up voting for McCain -- though without enthusiasm.
I think it's important, though, that we conservatives make McCain and his campaign actually work to get us on board.
At this stage, however, I haven't seen much effort on their part. I'm actually wondering if they believe they can do without conservative support because of "all the independents that will be attracted to his candidacy". Kristol, for one, seems to think so.
Time will tell.
Sorry, but it doesn’t make sense to me.
I’m a conservative.
I’m not a republican. That means I can’t vote McCain given how many times he’s stabbed conservatives and conservatism in the back. I can’t vote McCain because of how much he’s pandered to the liberal media. And to top it all off he now lies and says he’s one of us. Maybe.... just maybe had he at least been willing to be honest I’d vote for him. But now, forget it. I’d vote karl marx before mccain.
And there’s only one way I could vote Huckabee, that being his Veep pick. He would have to make a *HUGE* step to show me that he’s not just some republican, that he actually has his stuff in gear.
If McCain is the choice, I’d rather have Jimmy Carter 2.0. 4 years of carter got us 8 years of reagan. It’s a clear logical choice given how liberal McCain is.
Here:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/mccains_acu_ratings.html
It would really hurt me to vote for Hillary. But I will do it instead of voting McCain. I believe fully that McCain would be our first mexican president. I’m hoping that Obama beats Hillary, I’d find that a lot easier because of what he’d do to the racist lobby.(the liberal media and sharpton’s of the world)
You can’t call a nation who has elected a black man racist. They’ll try. But they have a huge setback.
-————Neither is/was GWB, Dole, GHWB, Ford, or Nixon.————
I understand that. But there’s a difference. I don’t remember any of these guys actively pandering to the liberal media and especially not leading the charge for the other side. Not as many times as McCain has. I can understand compromise. I can also understand a certain belief; for example Bush on amnesty. I don’t agree with it, but Bush isn’t pushing amnesty because he wants to GET conservatives. McCain wants to GET us, he’s made it clear he wants to GET us since 2000. Fine. Come get me McCain, you can have it all.
Except my vote. Screw. You.
———The GOP nominating far-less-than conservative candidates is nothing new.-————
And given how liberal the other side is, I could’ve held my nose to vote for any one of them. I could’ve done so for Romney. Not McCain. McCain has actively led the charge for the other side, he’s called us(mostly implication) racists and nativists and xenophobes and all of that. He’ll never get my vote.
That’s too far over the line.
-————First, no Democratic President is going to be able to stay in Iraq and get reelected.————
No president who leads a nation to defeat can get re-elected. Period. Not with a busted-monopoly-media.
Just think “the defeat president”. It simply cannot happen, unless the opposition puts forth someone so bad, who runs such a horrible campaign, who utterly fails to inspire. And gets caught in a murder or something.
-———What blocked the Democratic Congress was Bush’s determination.-————
What will block a democratic president will be a portion of congress.
Nobody will try to stop a liberal mccain pushing liberal legislations.
-———Second, if you think there is no difference between McCain and the Democrats then you shouldn’t vote.—————
I see a difference, a clear difference. In this instance, the D is better. They’re pretty close to being openly liberal. McCain stabs us in the back, then claims to be one of us, and expects us to grant him amnesty.
———But McCain is far better then any Democrat in many areas, such as pro-life, national defense and spending.-————
Life yes, ND most likely, and spending probably not. He is a fiscal nightmare considering McCain Lieberman.
And my original comment, I stand by it. McCain’s unlikely nominate constitutional judges who are going to overturn his babies; his major bills.
————So you think Pence is going to be the next Reagan?————
No, I think that Pence has the potential to fill those shoes. Nobody’s perfect. And people change.
———Even Reagan couldn’t pass the litmus tests that many Conservatives have today!—————
Not this conservative. Reagan wasn’t perfect either. I’m not looking for perfection, I’m just not willing to accept someone who represents Mexico better than they represent the US.
Did you know that Reagan lobbied Congress to pass the assault weapons ban in 1994?
Romney has the same position on guns that Reagan had as far as assault weapons. Personally, I think it’s a reasonable position too.
I believe that Reagan was suffering from the ravages of Alzheimer's disease in 1994 and was in no shape to lobby Congress
“I sincerely believe that we must come together to support McCain, mend the GOP and defeat the dimocrats.”
And I sincerely believe that if we support McCain and he wins in Nov., the GOP will continue to slide to the left, Congress will continue to pick up Dems, and we’ll go the way of Europe.
No thanks.
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.