Posted on 06/21/2004 5:41:56 PM PDT by freedom44
As I said in Freepmail, I didn't want to hijack the thread. If clicking on URLs is beyond you, that's too bad. Your nastiness doesn't make for a cordial exchange, anyway.
Go...run away and just keep on telling yourself how principled and brilliant you are,whilst I laugh my socks off at you and than GOD, that nobody has to count on you for anything.
Like those who cherry-pick quotes from the FFs,post them as refutation,and then get huffy,when on called on doing so. LOL
"the extreme religious right"...Aren't they pre-disposed to vote for bush and if so why isolate them?
No, he wasn't a shoo-in. Perot got double digits. I expected him to, as did many others. HW Bush didn't deserve a second term. IMHO.
Keep on dancin' and whistlin' and maybe it will work out. I mean, it's not like the 2000 election was close or anything.
Your sarcastic remarks make no difference to me. The facts are that the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party have complete nobody's running this year, and they won't have the effect discussed by this article.
The Constitution Party is irrelevant.
The Libertarian Party will take far fewer voters than they have in the recent past. Those people (like myself) who share much in common with the LP positions on domestic issues will never vote for the Party. Why? Simply because in the era of terror and Islamofacism the LP is insane when it comes to national defense, foreign policy and the war on terror. The notion that we can become "fortress America" and withdraw from the World is absurd. Open borders? Are you kidding?
This election is too important to play games. I have many misgivings about the GOP and this White House. However, outside the war on terror, all pales in significance.
except in razor thin situations like florida 2000 where if buchanan got 8 (eight) extra votes per county algor would be president...
as marginal or as splinter-prone you deem the const. party to be, they could resonate dynamically with extreme religious conservatives and strict constitutionlist in the bible belt...and if they could cost a strategic state or two, like fl, they could be sending more than a message...i say: bring 'em back home...
Here's an excerpt. These are some facts...
Repression's point man, John Ashcroft, overturned Janet Reno's hands-off approach to state medical regulation, and has only recently been rebuked for overstepping his authority: The 'fifty laboratories of democracy' concept resists a national board of 'czars.'
The 'under God' controversy, sexual freedom laws, gay marriage, the 'Ten Commandments' rulings, point to a future of respect for the individual and his liberty free from victimless criminalization and petty moralizing.
In a day when 'Republican' has little relation to 'conservative,' it's no surprise 'normal' Americans are experiencing a Columbian shock. This isn't India, Captain, it's the New World.
It's interesting to see how many sheeple-on-the-Right willingly participate in fragmenting the conservative vote by voting for the Conservative party de jour. No wonder we can't get rid of the Liberals. It's the voters, stupid.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/1126568/posts?page=1
Idiocy? Have you ever bothered to read the founding platform for the Republican Party? (Above) Read it and tell me how many Republicans come anywhere close to those dictums. Yet you feel the need to consider those of principle idiots? The idiots are the ones who keep voting for the same side after they've been betrayed time and time again. Read it and weep. That is why the CP is now number three and growing faster than the other two parties. People are just sick and tired of being sold out.
Yeah, but I think many are also sick and tired of having to live in the real world. Conservative third parties have had absolutely no political impact in modern American political history. Perot had an impact, but 1) he wasn't a party, but a personality; and 2) his issues were not ideological in nature. George Wallace had an impact, but again, as a potent personality; it was him, not his party.
It all comes down to whether you think Bush is preferable to Kerry. Anyone who denies that Bush is preferable (however flawed) is simply too stupid or too unhinged from reality to debate with.
I wonder if he knows that Peroutka wants to cut and run from Iraq ....
Some of us conservatives don't wish to share the title with organizations that dance all over the racism line. And the "blame everything on the Mexicans" lines those organizations sometimes espouse is clearly over the line and is a serious taint that we do not wish to have associated with us.
So ..... what do you like about the Constitution candidate this time around? Cutting-and-running in Iraq? or surrendering to Osama?
Yes President Bush has done and will do some things I don't like. But Kerry will do EVERYTHING I don't want done.
A vote against Bush is a vote FOR Kerry. Only idiots can't see that.
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.