A big part of the anti-McCain argument is that the worst that can happen is, with Barack Obama, the US would have a slightly more liberal president. The reality, though, is that with a President Obama, radical Islamic extremists would have a neutral or even sympathetic president instead of one, like Sen. McCain, who has promised to take the fight to the terrorists and “never surrender.”
I attended a GOP county convention this year and was stunned by the number of appeasers (supporting Rep. Paul) who showed up, sounding a lot like Rev. Jeremiah Wright in their views on US foreign policy and on the men and women of the US military. I felt ripped off...if I wanted appeasement, I could have attended the Democrat caucus. But I understand this discussion much better, having talked with strongly anti-military conservatives (or appeasers) at that recent meeting.
There are real reasons to be frustrated with Sen. McCain. I found his interference on the Wright ads in NC last month difficult to comprehend. Many posters have pointed out legitimate problems with his record in the Senate since 2001. But it is beyond delusional to argue that the outcome of the presidential race doesn’t matter in 2008.
Great Galloping Guacamoles! I actually said that? REALLY -- ?!?
Where?
Then I learned even more about Obama, and had the “pleasure” of listening to Hillary even more, and then came the possibility of a Ron Paul conversion to Obama (Ron wasn't my guy, but still had me curious for a while) so I've decided no matter what, voting for McCain is still better than voting for Hillary or Obama.
I live in Washington too. Sometimes the best vote is for the least left candidate ... not necessarily the most right ... just the least left. At this point I just want to make sure I can live to vote another day ... with Obama I can't even be sure of that. Just imagine what the world would be like with a Jimmy Carter presidency if Iran had nukes back then.