“Don’t you see? There is no win here.”
I so agree with you on that. There really is no win. I don’t like McCain any more than the others on this forum, but what decided it for me was the 3 issues that I pointed out in my first post. I decided that I would support our troops, that I would support living babies, and that I would support less or no taxes - I figured that’s what Reagan would do if given the same bad choices. What I think he wouldn’t do is throw a tantrum and walk away crying because the glass was 3/4 full (If he was like a lot of the neo-RINOS on this forum, he would have simply dropped out of public life after losing his presidential run the first time and he would never have been president).
Someone mentioned the option of voting conservative down ticket and I like that idea to a point, except that it doesn’t support the troops and we end up losing the war on terror. I can’t suport that.
The other thing that helped me decide is the quote we all know:
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
Seems to me that a lot of good “men” on this forum propose to do nothing as something. Again, I can’t support that.
I can appreciate your principled approach—supporting the troops, saving the babies, and no or less taxes.
As far as less or no taxes, McCain Lieberman will collapse this economy, meaning lots of taxes for bailouts of consumers and business and state governments. McCain Kennedy will make permanent the tax level required to take care of 20 million new citizens, and let’s not forget the additonal 30 million family members that they will be allowed to sponsor.
As far as saving the babies, John McCain has spoken out of both sides of his mouth. He may have voted well, but he has not been an outspoken fighter for babies and against abortion. Indeed each is quoted as being on both sides of the issue. Besides there is no guarantee that he will appoint constructiuonist judges. The Gang of 14 which he founded took many of those away and allowed the status quo in the Senate. It has not been shown that McLame will allow judges that Ted Kennedy does not approve of. So the chances are we will get more David Souters rather than Sam Alitos. So good luck with that.
The last point is support for the troops. Yes, McCain might be good on that. Will he be as stron as Bush has been in the face of withering pressure to do otherwise? It is much easier as a Senator to preach and bully than as the Commander in Chief who alone is responsible for them and the mission. Also, when McLame says he is tough on national security, how does that square with his sudden found need to build the wall, and his work to shove amnesty down our throats before we could react to it?
For the points for which McCain is viable in your eyes, you can see that he is not trustworthy, except for Iraq. But Iraq will pass in importance. Having Gitmo terrorists in American courts on American soil, giving non-combatants rights under the Geneva Convention, and not allowing waterboarding even if the fate of millions of Americans hang in the balance shows that McQueeg will not be stroing on national defense or defend our troops.
By applying our threat not to vote in droves for McCrazy, we may yet effect the outcome of this nomination. I’m not going to fold now, and sing Kumbaya, so the Republican leadership can feel we conservatives won’t leave the plantation.
No, I’m proclaiming my emancipation, and they, the GOP puppet masters who would give us McCain to fight Hillary, can take full responsiblity for their actions and for their forseeable defeat.