McCain or Bust...Conservatives, will you vote?

[WiseGuyF686]

No articles on here, I apologize. I just wanted to bring a little bit of opinionated discussion in at this point, now that we stand on the brink of setting American back 4-8 years...

The conservative candidates are out of race, and it looks like it's McCain or bust. How many of you will close your eyes and vote for McCrazy over Obama or Hillary, in order to do minimal damage to America over the next preidential term...and how many of you will sit home and watch the sky fall?

Personally, I'll do just about anything to keep the Clintons at bay, including vote for John McCain.

[Domandred]

No. If we are going to have open borders, amnesty, high taxes, global warming treaties, fairness doctrine and more gun control then I’m hanging it on the democrats, and not the GOP.

And those are just the things I can think of off the top of my head that McCain is going to dish out to us.

[meandog]

McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain,...EARLY AND OFTEN.

[Terabitten]

Here’s my dilemma:

McCain is mildly conservative, but lacks the moral character and temperament to lead the nation.
Hillary Clinton is, I believe, an evil person.
Obama is a liberal, but appears to be a man of high moral character nonetheless.

Of the three, I cannot vote for evil under any circumstances. If the choice is between Hillary and McCain, my vote goes to McCain as the lesser of two evils. If the choice is between McCain and Obama, well... character matters.

[djf]

Shamnesty won’t get through Congress. We won’t let it.

Seems alot of folks here are having trouble remembering our structure of government.

CONGRESS SETS POLICY!!

The executive enacts it.

[WiseGuyF686]

That’s another really interesting point, and one I support whole-heartedly. All we need to do is rally all conservatives to actually get it done and form it.

[Shryke]

Isn't it time we elected a candidate that can CRUSH these damned liberal bastards?

With.....happy trees? And let's have some nice titanium white snow, right here. Ahhhhh. There. That's perfect.

I am thinking we need to start a Bob Motherlovin' Ross (True Conservative) Ping List.

[Republicanus_Tyrannus]

"We are at war. The troops put their lives on the line for us. Which candidate will better support the troops that support us? Hillary, Obama, or McCain?"

Your point is one that must be considered seriously. A rational person must view his or her actions with the constant knowledge of the fact that we indeed are at war.

As a former supporter of Senator McCain (I am shamed that I helped elect him to the Senate) I wish to offer my thinking on this subject.

Senator McCain is irrationally angry. He doesn't just have a temper problem, he lives as a temper tantrum. His abuse of people who have only slightly irritated him is a matter of the public record, is consistent, and has always been repugnantly extreme.

Angry people, especially ones with as chronic a temper as Senator McCain, are simply irrational in the fit of their anger. Their judgment is absent. It is one reason we have recognized the irrational aspect of behaviour committed in anger in our own laws - see "fighting words" and the concept of "crimes of passion".

The fact that angry people are by nature non compos mentis is beyond dispute. Those therefore with a consistent and persistent temper problem are subject to simply being insane/irrational a great portion of their waking hours.

Senator McCain is a greater danger to our safety and security, strangely, than either of the Dems. I am convinced that he is incapable of "putting a sock in it" and is enormously likely to cost us a hideous butcher's bill due to his irrational temper tantrums.

Therefore I'm sorry, I do not find your defense to be as persuasive as you may have expected.

[jincarolina]

I am also writting in Fred Thomson.

[Seaplaner]

I'm absolutely voting for (ugh) McCain.

As a Marine and Navy Dad, I'm terribly, terribly worried about what Military-hating president Hillary would do to our National Defense, our very security, and our wonderful men and women in uniform.

Hillary detests our Military, and those who serve (and served). I feel certain that one of her Marxist, America-hating objectives is to decimate, demoralize and humiliate our Military personnel and veterans.

Add to this, an emboldened al Queda will be on the attack on us HERE in the U.S.A. I fear that it will be at the very least, truly terrorizing.

There is one other thing.

What makes the petulant (Maverick?) Conservatives, who would withhold a vote from (Ugh) McCain, think that this would lead to a successful nomination of a "true" conservative next time.

In reality, they are just making deeper and more fractionated our future votes.

Hillary loves all of this, BTW

[Smokin' Joe]

Conservatives who will not vote for John McCain will, in effect, cast their vote for Hillary Clinton.

Oh, puhleeeze. That tired saw wore out when people were saying a vote for Hunter was a vote for Hillary.

It isn't.

Only a vote for Hillary is a vote for Hillary.

Anything else which makes her numbers go up is stolen or fraud.

Now, it is my effing vote and I will do with it as I d@mned well please.

[gidget7]

Well there are also a lot of us who feel the country is headed down the tubes, and McCain with help to expedite that, as much as any Democrat. We don’t want the country to go down in a “R” administration. There is no difference between them, let it be on the Democrats watch, and reclaim as much as possible the Congress.

[Ramius]

McCain can't win.

McCain beats both Hillary or Obama, or both (as I suspect it'll be) in every poll that's been done, and by huge margins. Moreso in Hillary's case. She loses to McCain by over 15 points.

[Democrat_media]

I’m writing in Tancredo’s name.

Not only has McCain worked for over a decade to give Amnesty to 30 million illegals so he can have more voters for Democrats and Socialism but McCain also took our freedom of speech away in America, Proof:

http://www.news.com/The-coming-crackdown-on-blogging/2008-1028_3-5597079.html

Bradley Smith says that the freewheeling days of political blogging and online punditry are over.

In just a few months, he warns, bloggers and news organizations could risk the wrath of the federal government if they improperly link to a campaign’s Web site. Even forwarding a political candidate’s press release to a mailing list, depending on the details, could be punished by fines.

Smith should know. He’s one of the six commissioners at the Federal Election Commission, which is beginning the perilous process of extending a controversial 2002 campaign finance law to the Internet.

In 2002, the FEC exempted the Internet by a 4-2 vote, but U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly last fall overturned that decision. “The commission’s exclusion of Internet communications from the coordinated communications regulation severely undermines” the campaign finance law’s purposes, Kollar-Kotelly wrote.

Smith and the other two Republican commissioners wanted to appeal the Internet-related sections. But because they couldn’t get the three Democrats to go along with them, what Smith describes as a “bizarre” regulatory process now is under way.

CNET News.com spoke with Smith about the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, better known as the McCain-Feingold law, and its forthcoming extrusion onto the Internet.

[Tex Pete]

Nope

[JasonC]

Yes I will vote for McCain. He is a hawk and there is a war on, and neither dem can be trusted with national security. Simple really.

[SUSSA]

I will not vote for McCain.

[Designer]

"We don’t need any third parties."

FYI: third parties are already here.

"We need to move all RINOS in every way shape and form into a party of their own."

Also FYI: the RINOs are already in a party of their own; The Republican Party.

[New Girl]

As a member of the “rich” minority who Bama and Hillary plan to soak for more tax dollars to fund their socialist agendas, including universal health care, I am absolutely voting for McCain. I guess those who are sitting home don’t have tax worries but hubby and I are already paying the AMT. We are NOT rich, either — except by Bama and Hillary’s standards. If Hillary and Bama end up in office, it will take another 20 years to dismantle their entitlement programs.

[ElPatriota]

... Vote for this weasel? NEVER... EVER... EVER... NEVER!

If this wasel wins, all social-concervatives... and even 'conservatives' lose I think...

All in all I don't think this is that bad!... It will finally forces US, TO FACE many problems with the Gop HEAD ON!... Event the way the selection process is done... seems to be designed to assure the wishes of the ESTABLISHEMENT...

I mean, all they have to do is "Choose the one," spend a heavy duty amount of money on the candidate... mobilize the "gop machinery" including the best 'consultants,' and all of the sudden???... IT'S OVER!!!that no one really had a chance to compete with the chosen one(s). That way the NRC or whoever picks the 'one' get their candidate 98% of the time.

What about 'allowing' independents to choose our candidate, they way they have done it this time?... Why is this allowed? ANSWER: Perhaps, because it is done in this way for a purpose... to keep the 'Conservatives' in check.. Paranoid you say? :)... well, just look around...

[Young Scholar]

McCain. There are a lot of things I don’t like about him, but on one of my most important issues—spending—McCain may have been the strongest candidate in the field and is likely stronger than most Republicans in DC, so I can certainly support him.