Posted on 01/08/2008 11:25:26 PM PST by Justice
ENJOY
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Sleep well and see you soon.
I didn’t put a monkey on your back. Facts are facts, and if you want to call one a “monkey”, so be it. I plan on voting conservative and have done my dangdest to support the most conservative candidate right now. My comments are for when push comes to shove on election day. You might be able to sleep at night if you help assist Hillary or Obama to become President, but I could never forgive myself.
Thanks. I have been dwelling on this stuff for years. It actually keeps me awake at night.
We were visiting friends of the family who like Giuliani and Schmuckabee. At least they know McLame is a bad deal.
They are way older than me, set in their ways and not likely to change their minds due to the fact that when they first met me, I was an errant yoot! I tried to point out the drawbacks on the frontrunners. Maybe they will start to think it out and hopefully do some research.
They’re more of the electability crowd, I fear.
I haven’t forgotten about you. I’ve read your post and I’m doing some research. I’ll be back.
I don't like McCain but he does have an excellent conservative voting record. I mean other than the two issues that really cranked a lot of us off, McCain-Feingold campaign reform and McCain-Kennedy amnesty. But Bush signed the one into law and would have signed off on the amnesty, so McCain ain't no worse than Bush on those.
It is ridiculous isn't it. The GOP since late 1995 has been AWOL and about as effective as bucket of gasoline putting out a fire against the Dems. The GOP has been dumbed down and Liberaled Down to about the lowest common denominator. The end result is two liberal parties now controlling our nation. Worse are those using Animal Farm scare tactics to make certain no honest change can ever occur.The ones screaming loudest you better not sit home or a vote for someone is a vote for Hillary each and every time are supporters of the most Liberal GOP candidates. I wonder why that is? If the GOP looses in November {and it looks like it is cruising for a loosing yet once again} it will be because once again the gullible bought into the only a Liberal all inclusive FREAK can win. Voters that stupid deserve to loose.
I watch the shameless hypsters on fox "news" pumping one slimebag after the other, then wheeling out their smarmy pollster -- the one who has those banal hausparti sessions -- as he queries, with his most pretend-serious tone of voice, on how they feel about these idjits. How does [insert idjit name] make you feel? What does "change" mean to YOU?
As pathetic as the questions are, the answers are enough to gag a black-plague dead-wagon's worth of maggots. ("Bring out your braindead... bring out your braindead...")
We are about to elect a ruler -- based on the kind of crap that in earlier times was only heard out the mouths of tweeners gushing on and on about "that new boy." ("You think he likes me? Oooohhh, he's so cute!")
If countries really get the kind of government they deserve, we're screwed.
Here’s some of the research for you...
1st Contra Aid Vote BEFORE the 1986 Elections...
2 Republican Defectors in the Senate
11 Republican Defectors in the House
2nd Contra Aid vote in 1987 AFTER the poor showing in the 1986 Election
8 Republican Defectors in the Senate
12 Republican Defectors in the House
Not exactly a stampede of RINOs...
And while you’re doing research, please name the 20 Republican Senators who joined Jesse Helms in condemning Reagan’s deal with the Soviets...it includes (from memory)Helms, Dan Quayle, Malcolm Wallop, James McClure and perhaps even Bob Dole if I remember correctly.
Helms eventually relented when Reagan gave him detailed information of the “trust but verify” part of the agreement.
Why can't you people understand that liberal RINOs pretending to be real Republicans are equally as repugnant, or even more so, than Democrats who don't try to hide what they really are or what they will actually do if elected? I would regard a man who tells me up front that he intends to kick my a## and steal my money with more respect than I would a man who says he's my friend but is in fact trying to trick and beguile me into giving him my wallet by saying he's on my side.
By the same token, I would be less galled by Hillary appointing liberals to the federal bench than I would by a RINO doing the same thing, and how many Republican-appointed liberal Justices and federal court judges are there now sitting on the USSC now or were there recently? I realize that the truly conservative Reagan appointed a liberal Justice, although the least liberal of the five libs now on the USSC, namely Kennedy, and also the retired faux moderate O'Conner. But I believe that resulted from advice by deceptive RINO advisors feeding Reagan false information about those appointees.
RINO Ford appointed one of the five, Stevens, knowing of his disastrous "living document" philosophy regarding Constitutional interpretation, and RINO Daddy Bush appointed the most flagrant RINO Justice of them all, namely Souter, based on catastrophically bad advice and urging by a New England Republican claiming to be conservative. The remaining two, Ginsberg and Bryer, were appointed by the Clintions and both have certainly lived up to his and her most hopeful expectations. By contrast, I don't for one NY minute believe that Duncan Hunter would appoint a single liberal to the federal bench unless he was totally taken in by some elaborate, deceptive scheme devised by untrustworthy advisors, and I can't imagine him having any of that type on his staff.
The USSC and lower federal court appointments made by the next president may well be the most important executive actions taken during his or her administration, and recent history tells me that a RINO president is little, if any, more trustworthy in the matter of appointing originalist jurists than is a liberal Democrat.
Judges, taxes, the war, security and so forth would be in better hands with any running Republican over the Democrat candidates.
No sense in getting your worst enemy elected because there isn’t the perfect Republican candidate.
"1606 is needed because federal courts have ordered the Federal Election Commission to regulate "electioneering communications" on the Internet because of the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act (McCain-Feingold). If H.R. 1606 fails to become law, your Web site or blog could be shut down for the 30 days prior to a primary election and the 60 days prior to a general election should you express "electioneering communications."
I have been shocked, also, by the support for McCain, Rudy, and Huck, based solely on their immigration stance. That is part of national defense-—period. If one of those win the nomination, rest assured, I’ll make their life as miserable as I have GWB’s on that subject. I just feel we have a better chance of influencing them-—except McCain, of course, he’s a Kennedy clone.
After the way I have been treated by youse guys for being a conservative, best I can say is, “Get over it”, all my vote are belong to me.
I'll take that one...
How about: Whichever one YOU choose, in order to win via party over priciple after you decide...
You shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
For all of those who don't think the GOP needs to be taught a lesson
No sense in getting a republican elected if they aren't substantively different than the democrat
Sorry.....Conservative 1st, Party affiliation 2nd
AFAIC there are very few candidates of either party who are worse enemies of conservative principles and ideals than Giuliani and his ilk. I won't vote for a two-faced pro-abortion, anti-2nd Amendment, pro-"gay marriage", anti-family values liberal just because he or she has a capital R listed after his or her name.
If the slide into liberalism by the Republican party isn't stopped here and now there soon will not be an organized party left to counterbalance the Democrat libertines and Marxists who dominate the other major party. At some point very soon the conservatives, both social and fiscal, who still remain in the GOP must do whatever it takes to shake out the liberal trash that has accumulated in the party, and start nominating and electing both social and fiscal conservatives who represent what the party has stood for until very recently since it's last major renovation by Reagan and his supporters in the early 1980s. When our top ranked candidates in the polls are equally as liberal as the Democrats' candidates and our lowest ranked candidates are the most conservative of the bunch, it's very clear that something is rotten in the party and that rotten deadwood must be kept from gaining a major position of power in the party organization if conservatism is to even merely survive in the party, much less to dominate.
If it requires losing an election and suffering through 4 years of a Democrat administration to stop the GOP's downhill slide into me-too liberalism, then that's the price we will have to pay for allowing ourselves to be duped into choosing RINOs such as Rudy and Arnold to play such important roles in the party in the first place. I spent 2 decades in a GOP which was run and dominated by northeastern country club liberals, and if that's what the party is returning to I won't remain in it and support it's liberal candidates for another election cycle, much less another decade.
You nailed it guy, and did it with much less wordiness and much less FR bandwidth than I used in #558.
BTTT, keep getting the message out......The BEAST is coming......
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.