[Brices Crossroads]

“Honest to God, you folks mean well, but you’re just plain idiotic. In your mind individual loyalty now trumps the safety of our nation.”

Now who is being idiotic. McCain “threatens the safety of our nation.” You are out of your mind. I disagree with McCain on many issues but I don’t perceive him as a “threat to our nation.” Did you vote for McCain? If you didn’t it would not surprise me. In that case, you have some share in whatever evil Obama accomplishes.

Weren’t you for Pat Buchanan? And one of Buchanan’s main nostrums was to isolate America from any intervention in foreign disputes. Yet now you have your arms wrapped around Dick Cheney, who has exactly the opposite orientation and believes in American involvement, including and especially military involvement, at any place and at any time. Yet he supports open homosexuality in the military (which,and I am no McCain fan, McCain happens to oppose) and which policy would threaten military order and readiness and you don’t think that “threatens the safety of our nation.”

“In your eyes God favors backing a man who is willing to reach out to those who wish to take our nation down.”

Good Lord. What a silly statement.

“We don’t need Snows, Grahams, and MeCains on our side in the U.S. Senate.”

Can you count? Count to 41 very slowly, because that is how many you need to prevent a government takeover of the health care industry from which we will never disengage ourselves. Yea. Let’s get rid of all of them, and the Dems can invoke cloture and you will get socialized health care, cap and tax, Cass Sunstein on the Supreme Court.

“Right. You think it shows character for a Conservative to back a man like MeCain. You know better than that.”

If it shows a lack of character to endorse “a man like McCain” for a measly U.S. Senate seat, then a foriori, it
showed an even greater lack of character to ENDORSE HIM FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and still less to RUN ON THE TICKET WITH HIM AND TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO SEE THAHE WAS ELECTED. I suppose the 59 million of us who voted for McCain/Palin also showed lack of character. Her lack of character from your blinkered perspective was already established when she accepted McCain’s offer to be on the ticket with him.

“Who do you support?

We are just under two years from having to make a decision on that point, and I am holding off on my decision until then.”

When I asked the question about who you support, I was genuinely interested. Now I could care less. I don’t think you have an agenda, though. I think you are just plain nutty.

[DoughtyOne]

Honest to God, you folks mean well, but you’re just plain idiotic. In your mind individual loyalty now trumps the safety of our nation.

Now who is being idiotic. McCain “threatens the safety of our nation.” You are out of your mind. I disagree with McCain on many issues but I don’t perceive him as a “threat to our nation.”

1. MeCain supported closing Gitmo and moving the terrorists to U.S. soil.
2. He also demanded we stop water boarding, which would have resulted in our loss of critical intel needed to prevent terrorist attacks
3. MeCain cosponsored a bill that would have seen between 20 and 35 million illegal immigrants become citizens
4. As a result of that plan, upwards of 70 to 100 million more foreign nationals would have come to the U.S. under chain migration
5. MeCain wanted us to sign on the the Internation Criminal Court
6. MeCain wanted us to sign on to the LOST treaty, causing trouble for our Navy and giving the U.N. a perpetual income stream
7. MeCain signed on with Lieberman a number of times to introduce anti-business climate bills that would have seriously damaged U.S. competitive status

And on and on it goes...  once again: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2451231/posts?page=263#263

Yes, who is being idiotic because they like someone so much they are blinded to the truth?

Did you vote for McCain? If you didn’t it would not surprise me. In that case, you have some share in whatever evil Obama accomplishes.

When Congress goes back to the Republicans this November, be sure to come back and blame me for it.

Weren’t you for Pat Buchanan? And one of Buchanan’s main nostrums was to isolate America from any intervention in foreign disputes. Yet now you have your arms wrapped around Dick Cheney, who has exactly the opposite orientation and believes in American involvement, including and especially military involvement, at any place and at any time. Yet he supports open homosexuality in the military (which,and I am no McCain fan, McCain happens to oppose) and which policy would threaten military order and readiness and you don’t think that “threatens the safety of our nation.”

Look at you.  All this bull s--t because you can't come to grips with the reality that John MeCain is indefensible and supporting him is a the last thing a true Conservative would do.  You dredge up all of this to divert attention from the train wreck that is taking place right in front of our noses now.  That's the tactic of a disinformation specialist.  Your acting the part of a disrupter.  You dredge up my past as if it's relevant, but when I link you to a list of many things John MeCain has done, you completely ignore it.  I'm not running for office.  John MeCain is.  I'm not supporting John MeCain.  Sarah Palin is.

Yes, I was for Pat Buchanan.  It's great to take military action on other continents, but it's even better to defend the sanctity of our own borders.  Today we face a situation that may alter the internal makeup of our nation forever.  If the open borders people get their way, over 100 million new citizens could be realized within twenty years.  That means that up to one third of the current total population of our nation would be made up of people who did not grow up here, do not have the same ties to our nation that we do, and could easily be swayed to move this nation even more toward the European model our Founding Fathers tried desperately to avoid this nation becoming.  And if you want to come down on the side of those who celebrate the loss of White self-rule in the United States, be my guest.

Do I support all Buchanan policy?  No.  I've been frank on the forum about my differences with him. His flawed foreign policy lunacy was clear. None the less, getting our borders under control over four years was worth his temporary poor judgment when it came to foreign relations.  And while you probably think this would have related poorly with regard to the military action tacken after 09/11, I don't think Buchanan (or any other president) would have been able to avoid taking military action post 09/11.

This is the second time you have made bonehead comments about my saying that Cheney is leadership personified.  Let's review.  Dick Cheney was a $20 million dollar corporate president before he stepped down to be Bush's vice-presidential running mate.  He's no light-weight when it comes to his corporate leadership skill set.  I have stated that I have differences with him on policy, but you have chosen to continue to beat this drum like a liftist drone.  I have been very reluctant to state I would back Cheney to be president because of his participation in the last administration, in addition to other issues.  That doesn't reclude me from addressing his leadership skills, and lamenting what a loss it is that we can't expect him to rule as a true Conservative.

As to what MeCain and Cheney support for our military, I will have to jerk you back to the reality that it is John MeCain that is running for re-election.  Cheney has no announced political aspirations.  Buchanan is not running.  And your attempts to move this subject off the issue of MeCain's and Palin's antics couldn't be more clear.

John MeCain is to Conservatism what Kryptonite is to Superman.  You tireless spinning isn't going to change that.  You're diversions aren't going to change it.

In your eyes God favors backing a man who is willing to reach out to those who wish to take our nation down.

Good Lord. What a silly statement.

So like MeCain, you think Obama, the Democrat party, Soros, Kennedy, Kerry, Reid, and Pelosi are the best friends the United States and it's citizens have ever had.  LMAO, nice one.

MeCain said we had nothing to fear from an Obama Administration.
MeCain also said he respected the Democrat Party and it's goals.
MeCain has also co-authored legislation with Kennedy, Kerry, Feingold, Lieberman, and others that was very detrimental to the United States.

With this guy, reality is such a bitch.

We don’t need Snows, Grahams, and MeCains on our side in the U.S. Senate.

Can you count? Count to 41 very slowly, because that is how many you need to prevent a government takeover of the health care industry from which we will never disengage ourselves. Yea. Let’s get rid of all of them, and the Dems can invoke cloture and you will get socialized health care, cap and tax, Cass Sunstein on the Supreme Court.

Okay, so you think we do need the Snows, Grahams, and MeCains on our side.  Well, I don't.  We need to replace them, and this year we will be retiring John MeCain.  The others will follow.

BTW, Have you heard of Scott Brown?  Just wondering, because your mention of 41 is comical with what just took place weeks ago.

Right. You think it shows character for a Conservative to back a man like MeCain. You know better than that.

If it shows a lack of character to endorse “a man like McCain” for a measly U.S. Senate seat, then a foriori, it showed an even greater lack of character to ENDORSE HIM FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and still less to RUN ON THE TICKET WITH HIM AND TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO SEE THAHE WAS ELECTED.

This displays an astounding lack of political savvy.  When Palin agreed to run with MeCain, he was already the nominee.  Her Conservative ideals made her a good pairing, in the hopes she could moderate some of his political insanity.  She was not endorsing his political tenets, but rather saying, hey you may not like him, but I'll be there to help moderate him.  That case was made across this forum thousands of times in 2008.  It allowed many people who could not vote for MeCain, to say that they would instead vote for Sarah.  You didn't know this?

I suppose the 59 million of us who voted for McCain/Palin also showed lack of character.

I let the record reflect what 59 million of you voted for.  I don't need to explain it to you.

I will never in my life vote for a man with John MeCain's political outlook, willingness to sell out Conservatism, and willingness to team up with some of the worst political players this nation has known.

Her lack of character from your blinkered perspective was already established when she accepted McCain’s offer to be on the ticket with him.

Your grasp of political matters is non-existent, if you don't realize that having a Conservative voice in a piss poor administration is better than not having one there.  And if you're trying to say I don't realize this, then you've made yourself a fool twice over.

Who do you support?

We are just under two years from having to make a decision on that point, and I am holding off on my decision until then.

When I asked the question about who you support, I was genuinely interested. Now I could care less.

No, what you sought to do is find something else to argue about so you could take the focus off MeCain and Palin.  Didn't work did it.  I feal your pain...

I don’t think you have an agenda, though. I think you are just plain nutty.

So a person who thinks it's a wonderful idea to support the likes of John MeCain thinks I'm nutty.  Well, excellent!

If supporting MeCain is deemed by such a person to be the Conservative thing to do, then color me nutty as can be.

In case you missed it, here's that link again: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2451231/posts?page=263#263