Posted on 03/31/2008 9:52:42 AM PDT by Norman Bates
What ever you and I think about the wisdom of bringing the troops back, transferring them to the US is hardly throwing them over a clif.
It is not a lie, it’s my opinion.
He’s trolling for a fight.
Hardly.
And when we have to send them back into danger because they were pulled out early that’s not throwing them over a cliff, bad, wrong, whatever you want to call it?
Obviously.
If you think so then I’m out of here. Enjoy the thread yourselves.
Thank you, Bill Clinton.
Again: you got, or you ain't got. And you've provided absolutely no reason whatsoever, thus far, for me (or any of the other posters hereabouts, waiting patiently in silence) to simply take your word for it, solely on your say-so.
You could have proved me demonstrably in error -- humiliatingly so, in fact! -- ages ago by now, had you the least scintilla of evidence requisite to so doing. You haven't.
No one, I assure you, is fooled as to why.
I will not vote for a democrat under any circumstance. Got it, good... nor will I vote for a candidate that has been forced down the conservative base’s throat without many voters having any say at all in a rigged primary process that we have witnessed.
That the one to come out on top is the one who sought to restrict free speech or allow this nation’s sovereignty to be abused should make many question, what the hell has happened to this country?
instead we are now the targets of abuse ourselves.. go figure.
>>I used the words “some mythical notion” because few will express in such words that they are demanding ideological purity.<<
The same strawman so many McCain people are parroting. Nobody thinks that there is a “pure” candidate. Even Duncan Hunter, who got my vote in the primary, had a few “earmarks” (although I think some criticism he has received is somewhat unfair).
I won’t eat rotten food. Does that imply I won’t eat anything except 100% germ-free food? No, everything I eat has a few germs in it, but I have to draw the line somewhere.
Are you talking about the same primary process that gave Ronald Reagan the nomination?
The insanity continues - GOP primaries were NOT open primaries in 1980!!
Good post.
Calcowgirl, well said.
Gridlock is the least unfortunate option we have unless McLoser gets dumped before September.
Some conservatives don’t realize that their only home is about to ripped away from them, courtesy of the RINOS.
“Some conservatives don’t realize that their only home is about to ripped away from them, courtesy of the RINOS.”
Exactly why we must continue to fight against it. Yes our numbers may be small in comparison, but if we look back in history, revolutions and the fight against any evil or wrong doing always started with small numbers.
Is it the same? I’m not so sure on that. altho states and their parties do change rules from time to time....if so, then I guess we could chalk all this up to a coincidental thing. ;-)
We had quite a different environment politically ... altho some similarities, energy , cold war, citizens being held hostage, etc were weighing heavy as well.
I love all the folks trying to equate McCain to Reagan. personally, I don’t buy it.. altho I would hope to be proved wrong were he elected but I doubt he would undo anything he set in action as a Senator, in fact, between GW, LOST and the border thingy, I a not so sure what he wouldn’t sign off on in the future... but he fought in Vietnam.. yaknow.
after further review, he looks more like a ‘Rockefeller’, imo.
The delegates have an option .. and actually a luxury with the dems at each others throat and could afford to dump McCain for a more palatable candidate and not one that is an “aRnie” redux on a national scale.. we know how well that turned out.
FRankly, he’s just one more Maverick aka ‘progressive’ , a Third Way stooge, and sadly , there are a lot of them around.
The lessons not learned in the 2006 cycle will come back and bite the party in the arse, bigtime, just a hunch.
McCain for President. He will be a great President.
Oh please. There are plenty of loudmouth holier-than-thou purists on FR who call anyone who fails to agree them 100% of the time a treasonous RINO.
Sure, you can make the case that there are multiple areas where McCain has been on the wrong side. But what excuse do you make for the freepers called for McCain's fellow Senator, Jon Kyl, to be run out of town on a rail because he disagreed with on ONE bill?
I'll be happy to post all the "Defeat Jon Kyl" posts from the lynch mob. If that's not idealogical purity, what is? Jon Kyl voted the right way 99.99% of the time and they're calling for his head on a platter because he disagreed with them on ONE bill. If you can cite another time Jon Kyl was "wrong", please do so. Otherwise the lynch mob in Arizona are clearly being idealogical purists.
I seriously doubt they will find a single person in Arizona who votes their way 100% of the time. Perhaps they should just run for office themselves against Jon Kyl and then they'd finally have an elected official they can't accuse of being a "RINO traitor" the moment he takes a different position on a bill than they would.
I can find dozens of freepers who are motivated by idealogical purity.
When you proclaim Fred Thompson/Duncan Hunter are the ONLY acceptable people on the planet to be nominated and that Tom Tancredo, who agrees with you 99% of the time, is a "liberal Democrat socialist", you're an idealogical purist.
When you scream bloody murder over the "Gang of 14", state is the SOLE reason you simply WILL NOT SUPPORT McCain, continue to whine over and over again as the worse event in the history of the U.S. Senate, even after it turns out to be not that bad and many judges you like get confirmed over the compromise, you're an idealogical purist.
When you call heroic figures who have done more of the conservative moment than anyone on this forum ever has, and has a proven record of decades of absolutely impeccable conservative credentials, like Robert Bork and Duncan Hunter, "RINO sellouts", simply because they didn't back YOUR choice in the primary, you're an idealogical purist.
So is everyone who hates McCain on FR an idealogical purist? Certainly not. In fact, most of them have very valid reasons to bash McCain. But is there a faction of Ned Lamont type fanatics on FR who hate McCain and scream RINO at anyone on the planet who doesn't agree with them 100% of the time?
You better believe it.
See my post #138. There ARE McCain haters on FR who demand ideological purity from their candidates. You can see it in the types who accused Duncan Hunter of being a "RINO traitor" for not worshipping the ground Fred Thompson walked on and screamed "liberal sellout" at him for backing Mike Huckabee instead. In the eyes of those freepers, it doesn't matter if you've done their bidding 99.99999999999999% of the time, if you EVER cross them, you're liberal scum of the earth and deserve to be purged from the party.
Are their any idealogical purists on this thread? Probably not.
But they do exist on FR.
I was speaking of this thread, in regards to the context in which it was originally stated. (See post #84)
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.