Thats just your own feedback.
>>>>Sure sounds to me like you support McLame.
You're allowing your imagination to run wild. I'm a FredHead.
>>>>>So go peddle your jive to someone who will buy it, I sure as h*ll won’t, and I will only vote for McLame with the greatest reluctance.
LOL What a hypocrite.
>>>>>I would vote for either Romney OR Guiliani willingly...
Now I see. You're a RudyBooster and a RomneyMite. You love liberals! LOL
If McCain is the nominee, I will be too busy to vote. I can pinch a loaf to honor him. If he wants one.
Conservatives will sit this election out bigtime. It takes a lot of enthusiasm to get voters to the polls, but only a small amount of discouragement to keep people home.
Has anybody here studied the history of the Republican party? It hasn’t always been conservative. That sea change occurred with Goldwater, and it was his defeat in 1964 that energized conservatives to work hard enough to capture the party.
Defeat can be a healthy thing.
I am concerned about the WOT, but since the heavy work has already been done in that quarter, McNasty really has nothing much more he can add there, except to screw it up, which is a good posibility. Romney and Rudy are far more conservative than McNasty, who is closer to Hillary ideologically than either of them. By the way, you ought to change your handle since McNasty is no Reaganite and Fred will likely soon be supporting McNasty, which his stalking horse strategy was designed to do all along. BTW, I may just decide to stick it to McNasty and not vote for him out of spite, and I think you’ll see the real hypocrite the next time you look into a mirror. Rush said he would support Rudy or Mitt if either is nominated, ditto for Mark Levin, as well as Rusty Humphrey and Mike Gallagher. I guess they are lib-lovers, too, or is your conservatism somehow, superior to theirs?