SNIP
I am not thrilled by Senator McCain’s speech this evening. I thought his words anti-climatic and at best a distraction, if not a distancing, from the conservative message. It is unfortunate that in degree his words deflated the expectation created by Governor Palin. Perhaps astute “Freepers” will explain how it is that Mr. McCain does not recognize or sense the evil intentions of those across the aisle with whom he much desires to “work”. These so-called liberal Democrats (and truly they must be labeled Socialist, even Marxist, for by their word their and deed they are recognized as such) these impostures of representative government, these quislings against the common good… are no different in ideological conviction than those under whose imprisonment John McCain suffered his greatest anguish. I am open to reasoned explanation. Admittedly, John McCain is a disappointment for me, and I do hold a reasoned suspicion of his motives; but that doubt is not yet cynical. Should President McCain repeat in the Oval office those legislative dealings for which he is notorious, then perhaps my opinion will become less charitable. I pray not.
The REAL disappointment for you should be the administration of George Walker Bush! For six years he held power, yet did not veto one pork bill handed to him by the so-called "conservative" Republicans.
In the four years prior to 2006, he allowed "autopenning" Sec. Don Rumsfeld try to run a war on the cheap that resulted in unnecessary deaths of our men and women in uniform instead of using the proven military doctrine of overwhelming force to conquer an enemy. He trusted his buddy "Pootie Poot" because he "looked into his soul and saw a man I can trust" and he slapped "Heckuva Job Brownie" on the back after Katrina. In short, he was long on "conservatism" and short on "Americanism"...he's a G-D bum!
Me, I'm a Reagan (gwad, how I loved that man) independent who is moved by John McCain's personal story and zeal for America--much of what I feel mirrors Reagan's. Conservatives to me are the Dick (5 deferments during Vietnam) Cheney, Tom (indicted) DeLay and Newt Gingrich (who, not withstanding the legitimacy of impeachment for lying under oath, incidentally did about the same thing that Bill Clinton did while criticizing his involvement with Monica Lewinsky). I would rather someone showed me character of conviction and love of country during one of the most imperiled times of its history rather than a love of some political philosophy.
Meandog stated: “The REAL disappointment for you should be the administration of George Walker Bush! For six years he held power, yet did not veto one pork bill handed to him by the so-called “conservative” Republicans. ... In short, he was long on “conservatism” and short on “Americanism”.”
Perhaps you missed my commentary on President Bush, so I will repeat:
“With all due respect to our President, Mr. Bush is hardly the shining example of conservatism. I would argue that he is rather liberal in his actions.”
In response to your disparaging remark on “conservatism” vs. “Americanism,” I insist: To which of my litany of principles do you disagree? The “philosophy” I enumerated IS a collection of CONSERVATIVE positions… conservative in the “American” sense of the word.
Meandog, you argue the demerits of individual men, those who wear the label “conservative” but fail to uphold its principles... yet you miss the point. For example:
Mr. Delay is “indicted” ... but one can “indict” a baloney sandwich. The tactic is typical for those of left leaning persuasion: “indictment” implies “guilt.” Guilt by assertion is not a tenet of our judicial system. A man must be PROVEN guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt” or a “preponderance of the evidence” (depending whether the issue is criminal or civil). The slap at Mr. Delay, et al, is a non-sequitur to the issue at hand. But since you insist to tread the deep water…
Meandog, how is it that you call on the carpet those individuals for their alleged nefarious deeds, but see not the shortcoming of John McCain’s detour from what you describe as “Americanism”? Was it “American” for Senator McCain to attack the Bill of Rights, in his attempts to neuter the First and Second Amendments, via McCain Feingold and McCain Lieberman? Was it “American” for Senator McCain to repeatedly pander the Hispanic vote, and compromise his integrity by soliciting an agent of the Mexican government, promising amnesty and citizenship to 12+ million foreign trespassers, despite the outcry of the American people? Is it “American” for Senator, and now Presidential nominee John McCain to hold hands with UN socialists, promising to subvert this nation’s laws by subjugating the United States to the phony Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Tax Credits, and all the other hype ascribed to the latest phantom of liberal lunacy: “Anthropological Climate Change? You throw stones very selectively, sir… but I digress.
I am defending the PRINCIPLES that true conservatism espouses. There is a difference. To be conservative IS to be American. You cannot separate the two without killing the nation. However, we appear to be “speaking” past each other on this point.
Only the shining promise represented in Governor Sarah Palin, and the awful consequence of the quisling Barak Obama holding this nation’s highest office gives me pause to reconsider my staunch opposition to Senator John McCain. I have a difficult decision to make this November 4, and Mr. McCain’s speech did not make my task any easier. That is the sobering reality.