To: brazzaville
At this time a vote for anyone but a Republican for a major office is a vote for a DemocRAT and that is just unacceptable.
Michael Frazier
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
No. There are times when voting for a republican is throwing your vote away. This is the case in CT. As much as Schlesinger is a true republican and a fine candidate, much like Perot< he is unelectable in CT. If enough people vote for a lost cause, Lamont will will the senate. Every vote on the war and on the palestinian question and Israel will be far left. Lieberman is actually to the right of many rinos on the war, that is crucially important for the next few years. The war will increase in intensity over the next two years no matter who is running the US gov't, Joe Lieberman will swing more to the right as the country does and will be a republican vote for the war every time out. Lamont, on the other hand will side with soros and the far left every time. There are old time liberal democrats, and then there are leftists.
Support everything the enemy opposes, and oppose everything the enemy supports. Therefore; support Lieberman and oppose Lamont. Case closed.
To: photodawg
No DUmocrat can be trusted with power. LIEberman will still vote the same way, caucus with DUmocrats....right along with the Harry gReid and the DUmocrats. Also, I don't see how electing someone who wants Rumsfeld to step down helps the WOT.
271 posted on
10/22/2006 11:10:07 AM PDT by
RasterMaster
(Winning Islamic hearts and minds.........one bullet at a time!)
To: photodawg
Good morning.
"support Lieberman and oppose Lamont."
I can't disagree with you in the case of Lieberman and the Marxist so you've got me there.
It shows that absolutism is dumb.
Is there such a word as "absolutism" If there isn't there should be. It sets me right off, yet here I'm being guilty of it.
Michael Frazier
283 posted on
10/22/2006 11:14:36 AM PDT by
brazzaville
(no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
To: photodawg
I don't trust LIEberman at all, as far as I'm concerned, voting for him is not a good idea, and sending money his way is a really bad idea. It's a waste of money. Once he sides with the dems it will be too much of an embarrassment. Besides, I think we can hold the Senate without him. Lieberman has voted against tax cuts and the American Conservative Union has twice given him a score of ZERO. Ignore the stench sometimes, sure, but this is too much. He's not getting my money.
385 posted on
10/22/2006 11:59:53 AM PDT by
alconservative
(I think LIEberman will caucus with the dems)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson