And so far, you've just killed your own definition of conservatism. If you don't compromise beliefs, how and the world do you justify supporting McCain?
Okay, so you do think Hayworth is identical to Obama. No problem, I just thought we should get that on the record. Thank you.
<>You have your list, darling. Please link me to the list you provided showing all the Conservatives who endorsed McCain in 2010. Since you say I've already been provided with that list, this shouldn't take you long.
Where have I denied that Sarah Palin supported McCain? Didn't say you did.
Where's my explanation as to why Hayworth couldn't win re-election? In your previous posts, which were shot down in part..
Or the name of a conservative who has NEVER endorsed a RINO? "Hey D1, I've fallen and I can't get up." Rintense, I have never endorsed McCain over anyone. Period. I said I could understand why some folks would vote for McCain over Obama. Hayworth is not the same as Obama, no matter how many times you try to infer it. There was no bonified reason to take a pass on Hayworth in deference to McCain.
Of, I forget, McCain is the gosh darn devil, a puppet of Soros.
Your attempt here to dismiss McCain's connections to the worst of the worst of U. S. Leftists, causes me to wonder why you would think this was a subject of levity. Any idea who financed the McCain/Lieberman global warming campaigns, all three of them? George Soros. Are you aware that McCain set up a political action group with Soros, Teressa Heinz Kerry, and the Tides Foundation? Are you aware McCain's campaign staff was hired on there for six figure salaries? Is this really that funny to you?
You see, you're stuck on that election, and in the process, you've bastardize YOUR definition of conservatism by parsing beliefs in a Presidential election versus Obama.
No, I've defended people who recognized a Leftist who was more than willing to dismantle our nation in the persuit of increasing Islam and Middle Eastern terrorist states. I stated that if they wanted to vote for McCain against Obama, I wouldn't join them, but I could understand.
Unless you think Hayworth is the same as Obama, which so far you must, there is not a valid comparison to be had here.
So far, you have played dumb to keep your clueless claims in tact. It's not working.
You said:
Rintense, what you are defending goes against everything I believe as a Conservative. You are buttressing the idea that it's perfectly okay to support a man that would do harm to your nation, rather than support a man that would be better.
Yes Rintense, that's what I said. Against McCain people could reasonably conclude that Obama would do more damage.
And yes Rintense, that's what I said. Against Hayworth, McCain would be the one who would do more damage to the nation.
So far you're unable to grasp that. It's actually a very simple concept.
Now tell me, who do you think would harm the country more?
Based on your own words, I'd bet you'd vote for McCain again over Obama.
Once again, I will never vote for the likes of John McCain. Are you reading my responses to you?
I wouldn't.
Okay good. Then why are you defending someone who pushed to get McCain re-elected?
Let me ask you this, and its a fair question:
Do you believe that those who support Palin are not conservative?
I'm not going to sit here and make some all encompasing comment about Palin's supporters. I have seen what some of those supporters have been willing to do with regard to other Conservatives. Frankly, that does raise some questions about that segment of her supporters.