Posted on 05/12/2008 5:13:18 AM PDT by Invisigoth
My friend and colleague David Karki is about as devoted to the United States Constitution, along with its principles of limited government, as anyone I’ve ever known. And unlike the Ron Paul types who have tumbled from this perch headlong into international isolationism, Dave still recognizes and respects the blessing of American exceptionalism and our need to maintain a strong international presence – including in Iraq, where he steadfastly supports American victory.
Now that’s what I call a real conservative.
So why is David Karki OK with the prospect of Barack Obama becoming the 44th president of the United States? It’s because American conservatives have become frustrated and grouchy, and some figure any result will be a disaster, so we might as well let the Democrats take the blame for it.
(Excerpt) Read more at northstarwriters.com ...
But if conservatism is the right way to govern and best for the nation - and I agree that it is - when why should it take “guts” to do it?
This is only true because conservatives have a) failed to persuade the public at large or the superiority of their beliefs; and b) failed when put in office to keep their promises.
How hard is it to win an argument when you’re right?
Instead of getting mad and taking your ball and going home because no one will listen to you/respect you/nominate your candidates, you should take a long hard look at yourselves and consider why that is.
It’s not because your ideas are wrong. So then, why?
Are your more loyal to the cause of conservatism, and therefore to our nation, or are you more loyal to the GOP?
I am not rationalizing anything. I am considering what is in the best interest of the USA and our freedoms that go with it. I care not the least for the short term interest of any group of politicians (political parties).
What is nonsense, the author, or my reading of what he is saying?
I’ve stated this before, there is no way someone from Oachita Baptist Bible College will be elected President.
Romney was dissed mostly by Evangelical Fundamentalist conservatives.
Fred (my choice) did a lousy job campaigning.
If I wanted to waste my vote I’d write in Jack Kemp, but what the heck, I’ll hold my nose, too.
As to the “conservatives fault”, I only point to what they did(n’t) do when they had the chance.
bump
Now the current nominee, apparently, doesn't even feel the need to pay lip services to the conservative base and the Republican party is once again the minority party.
Asking this disaffected conservative base to work hard for a new set of "conservatives" leaves a bad taste in the mouth of many conservatives who view the situation "fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Certainly taking your marbles and going home is not a winning strategy, but playing with a person who steals your marbles is equally fruitless.
My personal view is that conservatives have made a big mistake in viewing their road to success as being loyal supporters of the Republican party. That results in conservatives being taken for granted at best.
We need to follow the left's example. They have successfully moved the Democrat party to the left from the outside with numerous special interest groups such as the ACLU, Greenpeace, AARP, and a multitude of others. These groups have been quite successful in setting policy for the Democratic party and the country.
But you still haven’t tackled the key question: Why would a person, once in office, compromise his conservative principles (or “principles” if you prefer) for the sake of political expediency?
He wouldn’t, if conservative ideas were widely understood by the populace as the best ideas for the country.
I think I did answer the question, just not very eloquently. Rather than work through the Republican party, conservatives need to devote their efforts to support and build grass-roots organizations, which influence and educate public opinion, thus pulling the party to the right along with the populace.
“we will sorely need the presidential veto to stop the flood of socialist legislation/spending that will flow from Congress.”
McCain? Veto socialist legislation?
Ha.
HaHa.
HaHaHaHa!!
That’s a good one Johnny! I’ll have to remember that!
Let’s say it again:
“We controlled the White House and both houses of Congress for the first six years of this millennium, and hardly accomplished any of the agenda we had touted for the better part of 40 years. This is hard to admit, but it is true: An awful lot of those failed Republican congressmen were not moderates. They were conservatives who didn’t have the guts to govern according to their principles.”
Action - or lack of it - has consequences.
“I believe conservatives should stay nominally Republican and put pressure on McCain.”
Well, that’s a great idea, but how do you pressure someone that doesn’t give a damn about what you think?
The only ‘real deal’ conservative on the list was Duncan Hunter. I’ll write him in.
An Obama Presidency would mean three things:
#1: A United, Conservative and Aggressive Opposition party, that sweeps into office in the midterm elections.
#2: No Moderate “R” as President to have to watch sell us out while we are force fed the BS line that we “must” support “our” President.
#3: A Conservative Nominee in 2012.
A McCain Presidency would mean three things:
#1: A divided party which remains weak, divided and in effective for the midterm elections and gives the Democrats a super majority for the next 20 years.
#2: Everything socially: from health care to global warming to Amnesty that a Barak Presidency would give us anyway.
#3: A nominee weaker and further yet to the left than McCain if not McCain himself, just moving further to the left in 2012, 2016, 2020, 2024, etc etc.
CHOOSE WISELY !!
You forgot the Supreme Court. Seven of the nine current justices were Republican appointees.
THAT is exactly why using the court as a Boogeyman to get us to vote FOR McCain is BOGUS!
The next 3 Justices to retire or die are very likely ALL Uber Liberal anyway.
Worst Case under McCain... Nothing changes.
Worst Case under Obama... Nothing changes.
John and his, cannot scare me into voting FOR him.
Good question, but you can bet there are going to be a whole slew of new charms over the next seven months.
THIS JUST IN FROM poster LadyNavyVet: "Here's an interesting tidbit I found at Rasmussen's site under his section on the Daily Presidential Tracking Poll dated yesterday: "Among Hispanic voters[nationwide], Obama leads 58% to 35%." Hey, McCainez, how's that turbo-charged hispandering working out for you? You might want to think about taking your brown nose out of the Reconquistadores' backsides and doing something for America for a change, 'cause guess what? The hispanics ain't voting for you! Is this poetic justice or what? "
===========================================
Now, just to show how "kind compassionate conservatives" are......I am gifting the McCainiac's with a brand new high-tech calculator---one that actually works.
The McQeegers really need to recalc the numbers of their (gag) New Repub Voting Base.
The first time I voted for President I voted for Reagan. But I am a little tired of people putting the man on a pedestal when he was hardly the conservative stalwart we make him how to be.
1) He gave amnesty to 3 million illegals and did nothing to stop the next flood although many warned about it’s coming.
2) He got 3 supreme court nominees only one of whom was conservative. He also pandered for the woman vote by making one of them female. 1 out of 3 is good for baseball but lousy for the court.
3) Pulled out of Lebanon without nailing the group who blew up our marines.
4) Although he got a huge tax cut through he also made a deal with the democrats for a huge tax increase.
5) He never shut down the Dept of Energy or Education as promised.
6) Never balanced the budget.
In short he was an excellent President but lets me honest he was not as conservative in action as he was in promise.
I am no fan of McCain by any stretch - mainly on illegals and global warming. But I am concerned when people say lets put an incompetent, nobody, out of nowhere to be the Chief Executive, hoping he screws the pooch so some ‘magic conservative’ will ride out of the sunrise and save the day. Who is this person? Reagan was a known quantity for fifteen years before he became President. Who are we waiting for? Newt? Jindal? Rice? (please).
Let’s not forget, everyone here thought after 8 years of Clinton the country would be begging for another Reagan and if it were not for a few hundred votes in Florida Gore would have been President.
McCain is a lot of things but he is not a socialist. He’s a typical moderate-conservative Republican in the mold of previous nominees. Like it or not that is the make up of the GOP - otherwise a conservative would be the guy.
John McCain is not "one of my own."
Global warming regulation, Law of the Sea, Amnesty, and so on.
He is a Schwarzenegger Republican and, along with his liberal friends across the aisle and a silent or complicit bunch of Republicans,
will move the country leftward faster than the alternatives.
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.