McCain: It can be “tough” to be proud of USA

Reuters ^ | 6/14/08 | Jeff Mason

[llandres]

How about this for a concept?
Instead of everyone “facing reality” that mccain is the “presumptive” we all quit getting in line and drinking the kool-aid and demand a change at the convention?

I’m listening. what’s the plan and what are the odds?

[llandres]

“My greatest fear here is that we’re being given the choice between cyanide and Strychnine. “

one has a greater survival rate, doesn’t it, especially depending on the dosage and duration of time???

[PastorTony]

They don’t agree on taxes, they don’t agree on health care, they don’t agree on right to life (not by a long shot), they don’t agree on Foreign Policy and they don’t agree on patriotism and love for this country.

I disagree and will demonstrate.

Taxes: both believe in a progressive Federal income tax. They both believe in the power of the IRS to regulate business and personal incomes. Neither one of them is calling for a massive overhaul of our taxation system which is what is truly needed.

Foreign Policy: Both are interventionists and believe it is the job of the U.S. Military to nation-build and to be the policemen of the world. Obama will act no differently as CIC than McCain and will eagerly put our troops in harms way on a "peacekeeping mission". The countries might change, but either way we will be in a perpetual war

Health Care: They both believe the government needs to "do something" about the supposed health care crisis. Their solution is a big government program. Neither one offers the real solution which is to get the government out of the health care industry completely.

Abortion: I'll give you this one to a point, but McCain does little more than throw up the usual rhetoric to pacify the pro-life voting block. He offers no concrete solutions to deal with this issue for example working to pass the Sanctity of Life Act.

Patriotism: When you have two candidates that are statists I cannot grasp how anyone could see either them as patriotic. Both McCain & Obama have a fundamental belief that the Federal government can and should solve all of America's problems. This is the exact opposite of the belief held by the Founders. So how can one say he loves this country when deep down he abhors every belief this country was founded upon.

[PastorTony]

Regarding your post #199 I have heard that argument before and it’s not working this time.

Vote for Bush/Bush/Dole/Bush/Bush cause he’s not as bad as Dukakis/Clinton/Clinton/Gore/Kerry and we’ll get a conservative next time.

Sorry, but it’s not working anymore. If the GOP continues the way it has been going for the past 20 years I highly doubt I will ever again vote for another one of their presidential nominees.

[llandres]

“If the GOP continues the way it has been going for the past 20 years I highly doubt I will ever again vote for another one of their presidential nominees.”

I’m an eternal optimist, I guess - get it from my dad who’s 90 and he’s usually been right in the long-term.

So have you decided who you will vote for - bob barr or ron paul? just curious, if you don’t mind.

[PastorTony]

I used to be optimistic, but when I look across the GOP leadership I don’t see anything to be optimistic about. Some may talk conservative, but when it comes down to it few trule believe in limited government and even less are willing to do what it takes to get there.

As far as who I am voting for, I don’t believe Ron Paul is running any longer, so he is not an option. I like Barr and also like Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin would probably be my top choice, but I don’t think he has the organization behind him to have any impact at all. If Barr can get off the ground with fundraising and balllot access then I will likely lend him my support in money and time. If not then I will probably vote for Baldwin on principle alone.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

I like Barr and also like Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin would probably be my top choice, but I don’t think he has the organization behind him to have any impact at all. If Barr can get off the ground with fundraising and balllot access then I will likely lend him my support in money and time. If not then I will probably vote for Baldwin on principle alone.

Why didn't either one of these "principled" men run as Republicans? Their chances would have been far greater as Republicans than either the L or SP.

There is nothing principled about Baldwin. He's part of the cowardly, thieving CP party. These nobodies are perfectly willing to take your money and your hopes and give you absolutely nothing in return.

I was once sucked in by them, too but my eyes were opened during the 2000 and 2004 elections. They used my hard-earned money I had sent them to run radio ads against Bush--not Gore or Kerry.

They were actually trying to convince listeners that Bush was more dangerous than either Gore or Kerry.

Now I know they are too cowardly to run as Republicans. They know full well they're never going to get elected to anything and they are never going to have to prove anything.

Keep sending money.

[pgkdan]

McCain: It can be “tough” to be proud of USA,

I see what he means...after all we DID pick him as a nominee for President.

[Wallace T.]

My problem with Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party, as well as the Libertarian Party, is that they have generally bought into the notion that American power and influence overseas are negative and that we have little to worry about from the Muslims, the Russians, and the Chinese. I agree that the current Administration’s conduct of the war in Iraq has resulted in a prolonged, no win war, and that there have been other disasters, such as our ill advised involvement in ex-Yugoslavia under Clinton. However, such blunders should not cause the United States to withdraw its military forces to the 50 states. Our withdrawal would lead to a power vacuum that would be readily filled by Russia, China, and various allies of theirs like Iran and Venezuela. The Arabs, the Europeans, and the Indians would soon recognize the new hegemons and cut deals with them, isolating the U.S. economically. Do we really want the high seas and international commerce controlled by two authoritarian powers where the repression, if not the economic system, of the Communists persists?

[PastorTony]

As a paleoconservative I am far more comfortable with the CP’s foreign policy platform than the GOP’s. And while I understand your concerns regarding the pullback of troops, I don’t agree with the conclusions you are drawing.

As it stands today though, we cannot afford to continue operating in the manner that we are, and neither the Dems or the GOP has a plan on the table that changes course to any great degree.

[Wallace T.]

As it stands today though, we cannot afford to continue operating in the manner that we are, and neither the Dems or the GOP has a plan on the table that changes course to any great degree.

I agree with your statement. The Bush Administration has seriously mismanaged the Iraqi War and has failed to properly secure the nation's borders. McCain promises more of the same. Obama is likely to acquiesce to the UN and NATO and essentially follow "international opinion", that is, the interests of the European Union, in our foreign policy.

I am "old school" enough to support the dictum of General MacArthur that there is no substitute for victory. However, what the Constitution and Libertarian Parties advocate is in its own way as bad as what both the Republicans and Democrats propose. Rather than fighting protracted wars or diminishing our sovereignty, the Constitution/Libertarian position would end American military involvement overseas. Some withdrawal may be in order; there is no need to keep a military presence in Germany or South Korea, and we have no national interest in the Balkans. However, walking away from our agreements with our European and Asian allies would force them to fend for themselves. Knowing the current lack of resolve among Europeans and their lack of fighting spirit, the Russians would accomplish what had been their dream in the Soviet era: neutralizing Western Europe. East and South Asia, along with the Arab world, will have to deal with unchallenged Russian and Chinese influence and would cut deals accordingly. Israel will be so isolated that its continued status as an independent Jewish state would be problematical. South Korea and Taiwan will try to work out the best deal possible, and perhaps Japan as well. The Chinese will continue to re-colonize Africa, a process already well underway. Communist subversion of Latin America will continue, with a new Iron Curtain arising there.

Withdrawal from world affairs is not an effective answer to neocon foreign policy blunders or liberal "America Last" policies.

[PastorTony]

Withdrawal from world affairs is not an effective answer to neocon foreign policy blunders or liberal "America Last" policies.

I agree with you in a general sense, but don't believe the CP or LP is wanting to withdrawal entirely, but instead return to founding principles. Those principles served us very well until we started playing policeman of the world circa 1945. I am by no means a foreign policy expert, but I know that what we are doing now is not working, what the Dems propose won't work either, so I am willing to explore other options, especially when those proposing them line up with me on every other issue.

In short, I would prefer a Baldwin or Barr (with whom I agree with on most issues) as CIC instead of a Obama or McCain (with whom I disagree with on nearly all issues)

[Just A Nobody]

I’m listening. what’s the plan and what are the odds?

We all know that the odds are little to none, since most appear to be dnc/rnc/enemedia mind numbed robots.
However...should we not at least try?

For starters the chorus line singing the old tune "Hold Your Nose and Vote the Lesser" should be countered, not joined, IMHO.

Second, proposing some anti-war nut is not the answer. It is not McCain's alleged pro-war/Iraq stance that makes many disgusted at his "presumptive" status.

The republican primary was effectively over after he was elevated to "front-runner-presumptive" status on January 29th having won only 25.5% of the vote count at that time from ONLY 7 states.

We were then treated to six days of non-stop fawning over someone that 75% of the voters rejected leading us to "super Tuesday" with 19 states having the opportunity to voice their choice of candidates.

4 states held OPEN primaries with various means of delegate selection.
4 states held MODIFIED primaries with various means of delegate selection.
6 states held CLOSED primaries with various means of delegate selection.
1 state held the monstrosity called Open primary with "Loophole" delegate selection.
4 states held caucus or convention style primaries.

4 states had Closed Primary with winner-take-all delegate selection, regardless of the % of the vote.
Here's a good example of one of those:
Oklahoma: mac with 122,772 votes at 36.64% is awarded 40 delegates.
While Huck, who had 111,899 votes at 33.4% received zip, zilch, nada.

Here is a great example of one Open Primary, so anyone could vote in the republican primary, which included the dead, illegals and felons I'm sure, with winner-take-all delegate selection.
Missouri: mac had 194,053 votes or 32.95%
Huck received 185,642 votes or 31.53%
With 8411 votes out of 588,844, McCain is awarded all 58 delegates from Missouri. Does that seem right to you?

The republican primary was completely over after only 26 states went to the polls. 24 states, D.C. and 5 territories were still awaiting their chance to cast a vote.

According to several republican elites I have talked to, I was blatantly lied to the day I went to the polls. I am still trying to find out the who/when/where to the "rules" by which I was forced to adhere to when I went to vote.

The entire republican primary was fraudulent, a bad joke, a circus performed to mesmerize the masses.
What now? What can one do with fear mongering, tired old cliches and a lazy populace?

[llandres]

With 8411 votes out of 588,844, McCain is awarded all 58 delegates from Missouri. Does that seem right to you?

I very much appreciate, and must ponder/re-read your reply. My first thought on the above portion is that (being from Missouri myself) Missouri is a winner take all state - in fact, I’m thinking that ALL states are, for Republicans - unlike the Dems, we don’t divide delegates or have “super delegates” as a result. The thing about “open vs. closed primaries”, to my understanding, is that anyone can vote in an open one, while in a closed one, only those registered previously of that party, can vote. Please correct/educate me if I’m mistaken.

[Just A Nobody]

Missouri is a winner take all state

Yes it is. My point was, with only 1.4% separating the top two, and less than one third of the total vote, do you think it is okay/right that one is awarded all the delegates?

- in fact, I’m thinking that ALL states are, for Republicans -

Nope, that is incorrect. That is what I meant by "various means of delegate selection" in my post above and that breakdown was only for the 19 super Tuesday states.

According to several republican elites I have talked to there is a "central committee" that decides on the rules that govern the primary...at least in my state.
I still have not found out who belongs to this "central committee" and how they obtained the power to set the election. I have some very cynical thoughts on the matter and continue to be stymied at every turn in searching for this info.

See The Green Papers. Scroll through each state and look at the "Delegate Selection" and "Voter Eligibility" in the section just below the state name and above the breakdowns.

You understand the "open vs. closed" primary correctly. Then there is the "modified" primary and the "loophole" primary. You can read up on those by clicking on those words at the Green Papers site. Good luck!

[llandres]

Then there is the “modified” primary and the “loophole” primary. You can read up on those by clicking on those words at the Green Papers site. Good luck!

Thanks and thanks! both for the continuing education on this and for the “bonne chance” wishes!