"That's a super-crappy plan"
Rachel Lucas: "I do not believe you’re going to teach anyone a “lesson” by sitting this one out or writing in Fred Thompson or Sunny Lucas. I believe that way too many people are ignoring the forest for the trees and that in doing so, they’re going to have a hand in electing Obama. Some say that’s fine because if the country’s going to be “ruined”, better that it’s ruined by a Democrat, and somehow magically we’ll come up with a fantastic, “real” conservative in 4 years even though there is no one like that on the horizon and everyone knows it. Like I said, I think that’s a super-crappy plan."
I agree.
I agree.
Labels: politics
posted by Helen at 4:38 PM
64 Comments:
Yep. If Republicans and conservatives want a replay here of what "New Labor" did to the UK, then, yes, by all means vote Obama.
It's completely delusional to think that letting Obama and a Dem Congress have their way will magically lead to The Second Coming of Ronald Reagan. It is not 1979. The country is not the same, its culture is not the same, the demographics are not the same. This is not the time to indulge in childish pouting and nostalgia. We have to make an effort to address 2008, not 1979.
I repeat, it's 2008 and Big Daddy Reagan is long gone. Deal with it, folks. The WWII generation that this country leaned on for so long is too old to keep wiping our noses for us.
So the Reagan Administration never happened, then? And the 1994 Republican Revolution never happened either?
In both cases, the prior election was characterized by very low turnout. In the aftermath, the low turnout was believed to have been because of the lackluster GOP candidates: both of them incumbent presidents who had betrayed the conservative base.
If you want the left wing of the Republican Party to continue to consolidate its grip on the GOP, rendering the difference between our major parties ever more a matter of rhetoric rather than performance, go ahead and support McCain and the other RINOs in the race. If you want to get the GOP's managers and strategists seriously to question their posture and the candidates they put forward, deal them a nationwide defeat they can't explain as a technical or demographic anomaly.
Helen, the Republican leadership is and has been INTENTIONALLY ignoring the will of the people in the party.
The only powers we have against them is the general vote and our personal giving to the party. Yet, you say we shouldn't use those powers.
But EVERYTHING else has failed. Everything. They gave us the middle finger; we'll give them the boot.
We will bring the Party leaders to their knees, drive them before us in defeat, and scorn them.
Do not blame us for their folly. We've stayed with the RINOs for eight years. If they were going to change, they'd have done it by now. It's time to drive them from Washington.
We need new people. We are going to have them. Count on it.
No matter what, John McCain will very likely be a 1 term president. Better him for 4 years than Obama. We can then spend that 4 years rebuilding conservatism in the Republican party rather than trying to tame Obama.
"We will bring the Party leaders to their knees, drive them before us in defeat, and scorn them."
Dude...You've watched "Gladiator" too many times.
Off limits, my ass. It's open season, baby!
The left wants all three branches. And they don't care who is in there as long as they lean in the left direction.
I agree with dadvocate. It will be easier to clean house with McCain in there than with a lefty at every turn.
Hillary needs to stay until the bitter end. Let her flap her jaws, so Obama will continue to flap his.
The dems want her out so he'll shut up.
Francis W. Porretto said...
So the Reagan Administration never happened, then? And the 1994 Republican Revolution never happened either?
Nobody here has claimed that Reagan never existed. But burdening the country with the worst possible presidential option for at least four years is not a genius recipe for creating a conservative America. It's a recipe for four years of absolute disaster for this country.
I'm disgusted with the Republican Party also but turning our armed forces over (in the middle of two shooting wars) to Marxists who regard them as idiots and murderers is an unacceptable indulgence of your fit of pique over the Republican Party. If they can handle getting shot at and bombed then the least you can do is vote for, yes, the lesser of two evils to keep them from being left twisting in the wind by leftists who hate and disrespect them.
Jeff is right--holding our nose and voting GOP merely validates their assumption we have nowhere to go, so they can do as they will, not as we will. Enough of that. Voting third party or write-in is a crappy option, but a crappier one is doing the same thing again and expecting a different result. Enough with the faux conservatives. Enough with voting the "lesser of evils."
Tweedburst - Jeff may have indulged in a little hyperbole, but really, I don't think it's possible to watch Gladiator "too many times." :) Sic Semper Tyrannis!
I'm a former officer of a College Republicans chapter, and frankly, I've given up on the GOP. The ideals are what matter, and when the vehicle no longer serves them, it's time to find one that does.
People, there's a time and place to fight for the soul of the party. That time and place is in the primaries, when if you had fought harder, you could have gotten Fred Thompson nominated. But let's face it; if Fred ran a general election campaign with the power and strength of his primary campaign, the Dems could have pulled out a President Kucinich by the time they finished sweeping the floor with us.
Let's also not forget that McCain was not the Republican establishment choice in the primaries; that was Romney.
You want a Reagan conservative to run for president in 2012? Get involved with your local party, become the establishment, and bring the party back to its roots. Don't get pissy and vote Barr so you can make the Republicans hurt, in the hope that they have a Reagan hidden in their pocket somewhere.
Remember the 11th Commandment: "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican" (popularized by Ronald Reagan)
Get involved with the GOP? Only if you have plenty of cash. Have you ever tried to get involved with the local GOP? If you have no money, they don't want to hear you. I left the Democrat Party, and I can damn well leave the Republican Party.
It left me when W got elected. Until they can get over their "good ol' boy" mentality (Trent Lott still haunts the halls), they will always be less than genuine.
I can't even go with my standard quip of, "yeah, they're phonies, but they're MY phonies."
They don't govern, don't equip their party, don't lead. They don't even amuse anymore. Unforgivable.
Two years of filibusters, followed by standard anti-incumbent-president congressional gains in 2010, possibly delivering a Republican majority. And, as far as hopes waiting in the wings, Bobby Jindal 2012.
Or, two years of John McCain passing bipartisan statism in the mold of NLCB, Medicare Part D, McCain-Feingold, and the attempted immigrant amnesty . . . after which the Democrats gain seats in Congress in the anti-incumbent-vote. Followed by two more years of the same. And then having McCain as the incumbent and nominee-presumptive in 2012. And we'd have to vote for him again, then, because the lesser of two evils argument applies again.
If we just push off the loss to 2012, then we get to have a Democrat in office in 2013 with what might well be two years of a filibuster-proof majority. You think Obama '08 looks like trouble? While if McCain wins in 2012, after sixteen years of big-government Republican Presidents, you want to then try to nominate and elect a conservative in 2016?
--
The argument for McCain is that Obama will fuck up Iraq so bad that all the other resulting damage is minor. The trouble is that it's a pretty damn good argument.
The argument for McCain is that Obama will fuck up Iraq so bad that all the other resulting damage is minor. The trouble is that it's a pretty damn good argument.
I'm more concerned about SCOTUS appointments. McCain will have a hard time getting anyone through the Senate, but if Obama wins, any takers on how far Left the Supreme Court will swing?
Think Kelo v. New London on steroids.
I've said it before and I'll say it now. Hoping for a victory by the currant crop of Democrats in order to teach the Republican establishment a lesson is like hoping your son gets lung cancer to teach him not to smoke. It would be disaster that would hurt a whole lot of people and causes important to us, and for what? Because the Republican ideology isn't pure enough for you? Bah!
Alright, I’m one of those evil Conservatives that will write in Fred Thompson. But, just for a sec, let’s assume I vote for John and my single solitary vote takes him into office. How will that differ from Obama or Hillary?
The war: With the massive gains coming to the Democrat party in 08, how the hell do you think McCain will come up with a budget to support the GWOT? Iraq will be defunded regardless just Vietnam was by Kerry and Kennedy.
McCain will pass McCain/Kennedy legalizing all existing illegals and welcoming their families. He is already backing off building the fence and now says we need to treat illegals as “God’s Children”.
As for SCOTUS – do you really think any even remotely conservative judge stands a chance? Do you remember the gang of 14? Rather than confronting the Democrats in an environment the Republicans were guaranteed to win, he turned his back on his party and worked a little back room deal.
As for taxes, as early a January McCain was backpedaling on tax cuts. Congress will be able to enact anything they wish.
How about cap and trade on CO2?? It will add anywhere from $1.5 to $5 per gallon to the price of gasoline. It will come close to destroying our economy.
He is adamant about joining the Kyoto crowd – this in the face over 30,000 scientists signing the Oregon Petition and new NASA findings showing the planet has not increased in temperature for a decade and has actually decreased for the past 7.
Given these things, what do we gain with McCain? I am so stinking tired of being hammered into submission just because our guys suck less. McCain barely eeks of a point or two above Obama. Barely. The coming administration, regardless of who is elected, will be dangerous and ruinous, regardless of who is elected.
Yo, CHILDREN! Vote for who you think is the best candidate for President NOW! No punishment, no planning for the future. Who's best NOW?
I see a super leftist, a leftist and a centrist. Which one supports your 3 most important issues the best. Mine are:
1)The War
2)Earmarks
3)Immigration
I'm evaluating them on
a) record (aka how reliable is what they promise.
b) what they're promising
My Results (yours may be different--but that's the beauty of democracy)
Obama
1a) The war. Promises to withdraw immediately ---Not what I want to happen -1
1b) Has supported this measure since 2002 -Bad -1
2a)Earmarks. Says he won't accept them +1
2b) Has accepted a butt load of them -1
3a)Immigration Amnesty -1
3b) Yep -1
Total Obama -4
Hillary
1a) The war. I supported it - 0 (yes, no, maybe so)
1b) I want to get out or not. -1
2a) Earmarks. I don't support them +1
2b) She's number 2 in receiving them (behind OB) -1
3a)Immigration. Amnesty-1
3b)Yep -1
Total Hillary-3
McCain
1a)The war. I supported it and I support it
+1
1b) Walked the streets +1
2a)Earmarks.I don't support them +1
2b) Hasn't taken one +1
3a) Immigration. Talking the talk against amnesty +1
3b) I'm the smartest MoFo on immigration and amnesty is me! -1
Total McCain +4
Do your own math. What's important to you and what's their record. Then vote on what the outcome is. This is the United States of America, not the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. Vote THIS election based on who YOU believe will be best for this country in THIS election.
Punishing a party or any other such BS is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
So let's assume we all stick our principles in our pocket and vote McCain and he gets elected. By taking the conservative base completely for granted, and running as a centrist/conservative leftist and pandering to independents and Democrats, he gets elected.
What are the Republican powers going to learn from this? What strategy is the next Republican candidate going to pursue? Rewarded behavior is repeated behavior.
We have to make an effort to address 2008, not 1979.
I repeat, it's 2008 and Big Daddy Reagan is long gone. Deal with it, folks. The WWII generation that this country leaned on for so long is too old to keep wiping our noses for us.
Well, I'm still of the opinion that the country is too far gone for any of this to matter. What are the really big issues?
- Lack of effective property rights protection (welfare, Social Security, Medicare, out-of-control eminent domain)
- Lack of effective civil liberties protection (do we need any explanations here?)
- Political corruption (Dems are just as bad as Reps when you look at how they dole out the cash)
- A belief that we can solve any of the problems of the rest of the world (how can we possibly do that when we can't even figure out our own?)
What is the common denominator in all of those problems? Us. We the people are the problem, not Congress or any president. We, as well as all of the generations that came before us (especially the WWI, WWII, and baby-boomer generations), were the ones who demanded that the government hire thugs to steal money from our neighbors and redistribute it to ourselves. We were the ones who demanded that the government hire thugs to steal land from our neighbors and redistribute it to ourselves. We were the ones who demanded that the government take away the civil liberties of our neighbors (we never want it to take away our civil liberties) to make us safe. We were the ones who decided that voting for the least of two evils was better than voting for someone who was honest and good. We were the ones who decided that the poor suffering people countries ruled by despots would be better off if we invaded their countries and killed them so that they could enjoy all of the same benefits that our style of democracy has afforded us.
Electing a Democrat or Republican will not change anything. All that it will change is which voting group's policies are enforced (which, because both Democrats and Republicans like using the government as a weapon against their ideological enemies here at home and/or abroad, will only provide a brief reprieve for the group that is in power).
If what I believe is true of our current situation, which I believe it to be, then wishing for the defeat of the Republicans in '08 is a step in the right direction. The election of Obama would be akin to the election of FDR (the father of American socialism). Anything that can help hasten the day when our economy and political systems actually crumble and allows us at least a brief chance to fix our systems would be a good thing (I believe that the election of Obama is the best way to achieve that - outside of electing whomever Socialist Party USA puts up). Electing McCain would merely be taking a slower approach to the same end (if he is elected and can manage to privatize SS, cut a huge chunk out of Medicare, discover the First Amendment, and learn why foreign interventionism is bad then I may change my opinion of him, but it doesn't look like that's happening any time soon).
Yo, CHILDREN! Vote for who you think is the best candidate for President NOW!
Bwahahahaha!. Hell, even the LP has decided that it would be better to nominate someone politically uncontroversial than to remain ideologically consistent.
Who will condemn our troops in the field to teach the Republican Party a lesson?
Not me.
What are the Republican powers going to learn from this?
That getting our men and women in the field killed and giving the jihadis Iraq is acceptable to a large swath of the party.
That politics is more important to the party than the country.
That the USA has no intention of being a reliable ally.
You want a more conservative candidate? Move the electorate right.
As a Canadian and a conservative, I have seen first-hand what happens when the nominally-conservative political party abandons conservatism - and, how to fix the problem. I wrote about it here, and in doing so managed to disagree with both Rachel Lucas and Francis Porretto.
Ya start talking about elections and the posers come out in droves to try to convince you to vote their way with negative rationale.
My sentiments align with database at 11:32. Use your friggin' brain and think for yourself. Tell everyone who is "informing" you of the proper thinking the proper response -- GFY.
Vote with your brain.
It ain't all that bad. I mean, here comes McClellan. In other nations, his book would never have been published. He would have died of radiation poisoning by now, or been shot and killed mysteriously, eh?.
If either Clinton were President, he would have been found in some open field somewhere, a victim of a self imposed gun shot wound to the head, with the suicide weapon 20 feet away from the body.
Two words: Allen Keyes.
Or that nice man who is running as a Liberterian. I do no get to vote for someone who supports all my positions with either of them, but either of them comes closer than any of the big three.
I am not voting to teach anyone a lesson, I am voting for the candidate that will be best for the country. The major political parties care for nothing but power, they cannot be trusted.
Besides, McCain wants to win with the disenfranchised Democrats. He does not respect my world view or respresent my politics. How could I vote for someone who wrote McCain Feingold or McCain Kennedy?
I cannot.
Trey
TMink,
Keyes underperformed Bush in Illinois 2004.
And remember what Baker said to Nixon about the Jews. "F^*k 'em, they don't vote for us any way." If McCain wins and real conservatives don't vote for him they will have no place at the table.
In addition, your mistake is in thinking you have to move politicians when really what you have to do is the much harder work of moving voters.
I really don't see how Obama could possibly be worse than McCain. I don't want Obama, I don't want McCain, and I don't want Clinton. I don't see a single bean's worth of difference between them. I honestly don't care which one of those political skanks the rest of the country wants. Once they decided they wouldn't tolerate having honorable men in charge of the country, further discussion or participation in the election process became pointless.
Obama would be a rerun of Jimmy Carter. Obama's naivete on foreign affairs would be extremely dangerous to this country. The possibility of him surrendering the sovereignty of the US in favor of some liberal "save the world" bullshit is infinitely higher with Obama than McCain (or Hillary for that matter.)
Bush was an empty suit. I knew it, but figured he was better than the alternatives of Gore and Kerry. I still do, just barely. Obama is an empty suit which means the Harry Reids and Nancy Pelosis are going to run right over him. By the time he's done, he'll be wimpering in the corner about executive power while terrorists randomly blow shit up all over the free world.
m. simon, while I respect your point, we are coming at this from different perspectives.
I think it is up to the parties to put forth a platform and it is up to me to vote. I am not interested in who wins, I am interested in who is the candidate that I think is best for the country.
So I am coming at this from a completely un-nuanced position.
Trey
This is too funny to be fiction. Conservatives arguing about voting for a third party or a democrat in drag who wants to be the republican party's version of Ted Kennedy. Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. Nice to see that the democrats don't have that market cornered.
"Once they decided they wouldn't tolerate having honorable men in charge of the country, further discussion or participation in the election process became pointless."
Show us you mean it.
I'll simply repost my comment from Rachel's site:
=================================
Not surprisingly, the Shit Sandwich voters have come out of the woodwork again. I fully understand your position, Rachel, as I used to feel that way myself. In fact, I accept my part of the responsibility for the continued leftward drift of the GOP these last [unsure how long] years. I continued to vote for Republicans because I knew that the Democrats were worse. Then the next election came again I voted for a still more liberal GOPer because, hey, he’s not as bad as the other guy, right? And the GOP leaders took that as a sign that they could do whatever the fuck they wanted and I’d keep voting for them. Unfortunately for our erstwhile leaders on Team Elephant, I’ve had my fill. If I had wanted higher spending, greater government growth and still more entitlements, I’d have voted Democrat in the first place. I didn’t, of course, but that’s what I got.
I survived the post-Watergate debacle of a Democrat dominated House, Senate and President. Ditto for the first two Clinton years, although the House and Senate contained some at least marginally conservative Democrats, who retired en masse once they were no longer in the majority. What I learned from those two experiences is that Democrats will, in general, royally screw up when given access to unfettered government power.
Here’s what I see happening after this year’s election:
1) Obama wins and the Democrat majorities increase in both the House and Senate. Whatever cockamamy legislation the Democrats dream up will get almost uniformly opposed by the GOP. Unless the Senate gets 60+ Democrats- a possibility, I admit- this fall, filibusters will be the order of the day. Nothing much good happens during the first couple of years and the GOP comes back stronger during the mid-term elections, when the opposition party typically gains some seats in Congress.
2) McCain wins and the Democrats increase their congressional and senatorial majorities. McCain is the one who proposes some bullshit legislation that President Obama would have suggested, and the GOPers in the House and Senate go along with it because Maverick is the de facto leader of the party. So he possibility of some craptastic piece of legislation becoming law is, in my opinion, greater under a McCain administration.
3) Regardless of who wins the presidency, there is pretty much zero chance of getting through another Alito or a Roberts. Obama won’t nominate them and a Democrat controlled Senate will never vote for them. Also, the most likely SCOTUS members to retire and/or die during the next 4 years are all left-wing activists. Replacing them with other left-wing activists leaves the court as it is now, a narrow 5-4 slightly conservative majority. Kennedy is, of course, the fly in the ointment there. Regardless, I cannot envision a way in which a leftist Senate would vote for anyone reliably conservative or liberarian for SCOTUS, so I’m not certain how things would get better or worse with either of the two candidates.
4) McCain has mentioned that he’d like to go for McCain-Feingold part 2 if elected president. Obama wants to bring back the UnFairness Doctrine. Either way, someone gets to try and abridge my right to free speech. You can make an argument that Obama’s policies in this regard would be worse, but you’ll have difficulty convincing me.
I’ve got a lot more that I could say on this subject, but I’m pretty much done with arguing. I understand perfectly your position with regards to voting for the lesser evil as I’ve done it too often. However, all you raving jackasses who want to call me stupid or retarded can go eff yourselves. I thought long and hard to get to this point; it wasn’t something I dreamed up while drinking a 6-pack of barleywine. I will assume that you reached your decision similarly and aren’t voting for McCain because you’ve got a brain parasite. I understand and respect your decision, but I disagree with your conclusion. It would be helpful in this discussion if you afforded me the same understanding. Also, calling me a dumbass doesn’t endear you to me or make it more likely for me to come around to your way of thinking.
TMink,
You are right. Loosing an election will give you more power than winning one. How stupid of me not to see that. Now I understand why the Libertarians are the most powerful party in America.
I just don't understand why they nominated Bob Barr instead of a real Libertarian. Probably they are tired of all that power.
==
As I stated before. Your real problem is not the candidates it is the electorate. Until you can change them you might as well vote to slow the fall.
Once medicine is totally socialized it is not coming back.
m. simon wrote: "Your real problem is not the candidates it is the electorate." Nah, my real problem is that I have some debt I need to pay off and I am fat.
"Until you can change them you might as well vote to slow the fall." Well, as a conservative, I am not jumping around trying to change people, it is enough of a workload trying to change myself and raise my kids.
I am not interested in the Republicans or the Democrats, and as far as I can tell, they feel the same way about me! I vote for the person who I think would make the best president. It will either be Barr or Allen Keyes.
You are more complicated in your political machinations, and you may have the right approach. I figure if enough of us start voting for the best president, things may change for the better. Certainly the Republicans neither appreciate nor presently deserve the loyalty of conservatives. So that is my voting philosophy.
I am not interested in a condidate's poll numbers or their "electability." I have decided that anyone who talks to me about "electability" is basically saying that I need to vote the way they tell me to.
No thanks!
I think you are right that once medicine is socialized it will not come back. As a psychologist, I can just switch over to not accepting insurance and seeing rich people to help pay for seeing people that are not. I recently told two insurance companies that they need to either give me a raise or stop sending me patients. In general, when the rules change, I figure out a way to get by. I trust that I will continue to do so.
But I do not see McCain as any less likely to fuck up the world's best health care system than the other two.
Trey
Oligonicella said...
"Once they decided they wouldn't tolerate having honorable men in charge of the country, further discussion or participation in the election process became pointless."
Show us you mean it.
OK, so it's not entirely pointless. It's entertaining if nothing else. ;-)
TMink,
Keyes did 20 points worse than Bush in Illinois. He was also significantly under voted: i.e. you couldn't even get a lot of those who voted Republican to vote for him.
If you want your views represented in government you are going to have to educate the voters.
My decision in that election? Better the Communist than the Theocon.
But I'm one of those small l libertarians. The "leave us alone" people. I get to suck the south end of the horse going north every election. No matter who wins.
I still vote R. Ever since 9/11. Because there are theocons worse than the home grown kind out there and I want the Feds to pound them into Islam (submission).
The US of A. Fighting jihadis since 1785.
Helen,
Here's the catch-22, and if you can solve this then I'll be happy to accept your argument.
If the Republicans were to retake the House, Senate, and Presidency this November, NOTHING would change. They would view the victory as a validation of their previous behavior and consider 2006an aberration. We don't want a pyrrhic victory, that's for Democrats.
Conservatives were trying to stage an intervention in 2006 over immigration; it didn't work. People like Rush Limbaugh ("carrying water") joined up after the 2006 election, almost every pundit has rhetorical guns blazing against the party. There is nothing left but to hope our friend hits bottom.
There is nothing left but to hope our friend hits bottom.
I hope a nuclear war is not your reward.
That is my #1 and only reason for supporting McCain. Of the candidates running I think he is the only one with the guts to fight now on the cheap.
But hey. If you think a nuclear war would be better for your children and the Republican Party then I'm all for it.
So, we elect an inexperienced, naive man as our President. He implements horrible fiscal, social, domestic, and international policies. We turn back the clock on the fight against terrorism, betray our allies in Iraq for a second time, turn our troops into demoralized political pawns of convenience, and quite possibly allow the most extreme regime in the Middle East to have nuclear weapons.
Why are we putting the country though this misery? Well, there's a slim chance that in four years (or possibly eight) the Republican Party will be able to pick up the pieces and run a candidate we like better. And, hey, we get back at all those snooty know-it-all liberals and those wishy-washy RINOs!
So it's all, like, totally worth it!
I agree with M. Simon. I am voting for McCain on national defense and judicial appointments. National defense is the most important issue by far, and I think it would be terribly irresponsible to elect as commander-in-chief someone as callow and foolish as Obama.
Also, I don't think it's ever a good idea to spot your opponents (the Left) a win in the hope that your side will eventually come back stronger. (Bryan C. put it well.) Doing so would harm the country, and an advantage squandered is difficult to regain. No one can predict the future. We would do best to make the best of what we have, rather than hope to benefit from future events that might not even happen.
And yes, the essential problem is that the electorate has shifted leftward. Politicians follow the electorate. People who vote Republican in the current environment are like people attempting to build a retaining wall against a landslide. They may or may not ameliorate the problem but they certainly did not cause it. Libertarian and conservative candidates will be elected again only when a plurality of the electorate changes its mind. Whether and how this will happen is a separate question, but let's at least recognize that lesser-of-the-evils Republican voters are not the cause of the problem.
Bryan, Jonathan,
Most excellent.
I haven't any respect for people who refuse to vote.
Jack, allow me to quote the band Rush: "if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."
I believe that rewarding the Republicans for their leftward tilt will only encourage them to go even further left. Not voting for them at all won't teach them much of a lesson as long as they are the only conservative game in town.
In 1854 the Republican party was formed, and started siphoning support from the Whigs; by 1856 the Whigs were defunct. The same thing happened in Canada over the last 20 years as the Reform party formed and siphoned conservative support from the PCs until the PC party was gone and the Reform party joined with the rump of the PCs to for the Conservative party.
If you really want a conservative party, you have to establish it before the Republican party implodes, and then encourage that implosion by siphoning conservative support from the Republicans to the new party. Give the electorate another option besides evil or eviler.
Give the electorate another option besides evil or eviler.
You know. I think a nuclear war would have the desired effect.
Obama '08.
It is time to clean house. Past time to clean house. For oh so many reasons.
The longer we wait, the more chance we have of the needed changes happening without riots and blood shed. Some sort of majority will need to rise (in the people themselves) and the nation will need to be seized from the others. Unfortunately, who that majority will be remains to be seen. All I can hope for is it's my side.
Nuclear weapons are the only thing that have prevented WWIV. I am one of those who believe WWIII was the cold war. Our capitalist machine allowed us to win that war, as did our capitalist machine allow us to out manufacture the Germans and Japanese (at the same time!) that decided the outcome of WWII. Even though our equipment was inferior for the most part.
I still believe that our military has to remain the most powerful military on the planet. They must remain neutral of political and social goings on in this country, yet stand guard at our borders while we sort things out.
We are a nation divided. I see things as getting worse in that department. The chasm widens. How long then, can we stand?
What? It can't happen here? Why not? Just because it hasn't since the 1860's? We lost more Americans in a civil war, than in any other. Different world back then. Different reasons now.
The chasm widens between the people, yet the differences between the political parties narrows daily.
What's not to see?
Why does everyone think Obama will win? If Clinton takes the nomination, all your arguments are void. And while I think an Obama presidency wll be unsuccessful in foreign policy, it won't result in anything approaching nuclear war.
Jonathan wrote: "I am voting for McCain on national defense and judicial appointments."
I concur with your thoughts about defense, but I am not so optimistic as you about his judicial appointments. I mean, he is less likely to put another Ginsburg on the court, but I am not convinced that he is more likely to put a Roberts on the court than Obama.
Trey
br549,
You assume our enemies think the way you do. Suppose they do not?
Suppose dying in a holy war is a sure ticket to heaven and heaven has more value than life itself? i.e. suppose our enemies are not materialists.
Then nukes don't keep the peace. They are an incentive to war.
BTW if you actually listened to the other guys they will flat out tell you how they think. I suppose listening to the voices in your own head gives more comfort.
I do think you hit the nail on the head otherwise. Your real beef is with the electorate not candidates. If you don't fix that first destroying the country to make it better will only destroy the country.
However, if you read your Bible you will find that there are always the disaffected willing to open the gates of the city for perceived advantage. Or just out of pique.
br549,
Of course the differences between the parties shrink. That is the genius of our system. It drives politics to the center.
Your real task is to move the center. Something you seem unable to do.
Edgehopper: Let's also not forget that McCain was not the Republican establishment choice in the primaries; that was Romney.
That is a good point and I was very upset about it. He was definitely the popular choice among talk radio hosts and I did not understand it. What's ironic is recently Glenn Beck said moderate Republicans from Massachusetts are liberals in most of the country.
Kevin: I think McCain is much better than Obama and the SCOTUS is a good example. I just hope he doesn't demand support for his campaign bill.
Think Kelo v. New London on steroids.
I remember this case and it is unfortunate that the Supreme Court can destroy the Constitution!
Matthew: Why does everyone think Obama will win?
Because the only possible way she can win is if Florida and Michigan are allowed and also if they don't count his votes in Michigan. I'm still hopeful that he will do worse in the electoral vote.
m. simon, nah. My real task is not to move to center. It is to vote for someone who most closely thinks like me, along with others who can go along with that, so that person gets in office. The government works for me, because I allow it to, and knowingly give it the power to what it does. I do NOT work for the government. How that got turned upside down is totally beyond me.
"you assume our enemies think the way you do". Never said that.But what I was speaking of is the hope our military would remain neutral and guard our borders from any type of outside influence (their job) should we become unsteady on our feet and end up slapping each other around within our own borders. And I do mean physically if it comes to that, because I believe it can happen.
If you are a "centrist", it means you want your half in the middle. You appease in every direction, at every turn. On a two way street, you're a dead man either way. It is not "genius" to drive everything to the center. Not in my book. Sounds as if that is what you want. Are you a closet socialist? You, and perhaps millions more, are living in the wrong country if that is the case. We don't do that shit here. Not on my watch as a citizen, and as a father.
br,
I did not ask you to move to the center. I asked you to move the center.
I worry about Islam taking over the world. If you think stationing the military at our borders will prevent that, well, less power to you.
Mirror image thinking: since all we want is to be left alone that is what they want too. I'm taking them at their word. They are willing to take horrible casualties to gain a world wide caliphate. So my attitude is: nip it in the bud before they kill a lot of us and we then have to kill all of them.
You know 1936 in the Rhineland vs 1940 all of Europe and much of East Asia and by 1942 the whole world.
Of course if big wars are your thing I believe Obama is the best man to get one started. Make sure by action or inaction he gets elected. The barbarians are at the gates. Open them. Then you will get to vote for some one you can really support by 'n by. Should you live so long.
We are like two ships passing in the night.
I'll make a deal with you. I'll re-read the entire set of posts on this particular thread if you will. Then we'll meet back here at the bottom again. It will have to wait until this evening when I get time.
Reason being is, I think you may have gotten what I have been saying partially mixed up with something said by another, or others. I believe I am perhaps guilty of the same thing.
What I have been expressing as my personal view of our interior problems, being the growing chasm between left and right - and the difference between our two largest parties slowly becoming non existent - has nothing to do with Islam. I don't see where that is coming from.
What I have been expressing is IF our internal struggles reach a point that we need to sort them out, safe from external influence or attack during said time, as in temporary, but complete isolation, it is my hope (and yet belief) that our military will take a neutral stance, and stand at our borders to protect our nation against any outside influence while our citizenry slaps itself silly until the winner only is left standing. And we hopefully again head off in one direction. And that direction being the one I wish for us to head in. I see nothing wrong with our nation going in the direction I wish for it to go. That same thing can be said by many, many millions of Americans.
Agreed, Islam would bury the entire world if it will not change over to their religion, and in their eyes are slowly in the process of doing just that. Yet China is the clear, immediate enemy. There is an article on Drudge today, one of oodles I've seen, about some of the things Chinese hackers are doing. Remember the Pentagon hacking? As tight a rein as China has on its people, it's a cinch these hackers aren't Chinese high school kids having fun. So who are these Chinese hackers? China has nukes. We walk on eggshells. Islam does not yet have nukes. We have an opportunity here....... But should Islam get them, I definitely expect they will use them. No doubt. It is my belief it would be foolish to think otherwise.
I did notice a couple of personal attacks in your earlier responses, come to think of it. I consider them unnecessary and uncalled for. So until we figure out where we went wrong here, how about fuck you, OK?
Opening scene: Lone man, sitting on the edge of a desk, speaking with an audience. Large screen behind him is continuously rolling videos of natural disasters, war scenes, famine, social unrest.....
The speaker, and the audience, appear almost like minded.
Speaker: No one wants war. Plenty want power.
In order to prevent war in the future and forever, what do we need to do? I think it is being slowly implemented in America, but the flies in the ointment - both internal and without - aren't on our [government's] wavelength at this time. Russia, China, Islam, as well as the minor players. Sorry, Chavez and the like. You just don't matter, yet. Save your breath. I mean, hell, infiltration by a single seal team, and poof!, you're outta here. You live, only because we allow it.
Audience: So, how are you going to keep everyone down on the farm?
Speaker: We simply need to keep people where they are. That is, after we make them a Heinz 57. So some mixing and stirring is in order for a while. We'll make the grass appear equally green on both sides of every fence. A tough one, for sure. Man drew the borders with blood red ink; but mother nature placed the natural resources. We can only change the borders.
Audience: So we make the grass equally brown on both sides of every fence?
Speaker: Good! You're listening. Then, we can eventually take all fences down.
Audience: Oh! You mean that finally, at last finally........
Speaker: Yes! Utopia!
Audience: But the American people won't buy that.....
Speaker: Pshaw! Allow, even encourage division, dissension. The people will begin to wonder who they are, what is right and wrong. Let them split and the gap widen, while the government closes ranks. The people will be so busy screaming at each other, we will be able to build super highways from Mexico to Canada, encourage the manufacturing plants through unfair taxation and regulation, to go to others countries. We'll call it, thinking green, or global warming, or something. Simple there as well. Just keep all camps divided and constantly arguing. This will bring our bordering nations up and tie us together, while bringing America down to a lower level. The government will be able to defeat corporate America and the Unions at the same time, with one fell swoop. The poor masses of north, central, and south America, as well as the Caribbean will begin to rethink, believing, "What do I need to go to America for? We have just as much (or little) here." New world north American grass, will become the same color brown. All in plain sight! It's genius!
Audience: But the extremely poor nations. And all those we need to apologize to, to appease.......
Speaker: We'll continue to
throw money at them, while everything else is slowly put in place. When the time is right, there you go!
Audience: But the American way....
Speaker: Oh, you mean let nations govern themselves, and we just slip in the back door and end up owning everything? Well, that's got to be modified for a while. We'll get back to you on that.
I am still developing the story line. I really think Hollywood will buy it. It'll be a blockbuster. Well, of COURSE it's a movie. We all know none of this could ever happen.
Audience: So, who are you anyway?
Speaker: Please, allow me to introduce myself.....
What Physics Geek said.
If McCain is elected, the Republicans will regret it. If Obama is elected the Democrats will regret it.
You people who think you'll like McCain's Supremes appointments are like beaten wives who think they'll like what happens next time you hear his pickup truck roll into the driveway.
You people who think you'll like McCain's Supremes appointments are like beaten wives who think they'll like what happens next time you hear his pickup truck roll into the driveway.
I was unaware that McCain appointed any Supreme Court Justices. And I thought he helped get the Bush nominees on the Court.
In any case you can never be certain. All voting for McCain does is improve the odds vs Obama. Seems like an acceptable risk given the alternatives.
the difference between our two largest parties slowly becoming non existent
OK. I see the crux of your problem right there. Winner take all elections move the parties to the center to win. This is a feature not a bug. It is the most stable configuration.
Now do you see why I said your real problem is changing the electorate?
As to external enemies. It is not just a matter of taking out the top guy. The citizens must be chastised so they make better choices in the future.
You are operating on the big man theory of history. Get the right man in and you get the policies you want. However, even despots must have at least significant minority support.
Rather than focusing on the leaders I focus on the people. Because in the long run people get the government they deserve. Often in the short run too.
I agree on the right man theory. And "either" side can say that.
Luckily, the "other side" doesn't have a "right man" either, at this stage of the game.
Speaker, continuing:...I'm a man of wealth and taste. I've been around a long long time, laid many a man's soul to waste....
m.simom;
I understand what you mean, I think, about moving "both sides" to a center position in order to win an election. That center point is a moving target though. And, no more stable than the current "whims". Our founding fathers were very bright people.
I make no apologies (nor should any American) for the fact I'm dyed in the wool with my beliefs. It took decades for me to feel as I do, to arrive where I am. I lean right, and that is as far toward the center as I wish to come. I was much farther left at one time in my life. Not bragging about it, but I'd like government freebies and give - aways, too. Who wouldn't? It's those pesky strings that come attached. Like the realization of "no free lunch". And the fact that "friends, neighbors, countrymen" and now my children, would forever foot the bill.
Ronald Reagan did not make me a conservative Republican. Jimmy Carter did. However, when I took the Neal Boortz libertarian test a while back, I came out as libertarian. Although I like Neal, the test is on his web site, and I think it may be rigged. Humor!
I hesitate to use the word chastised for making an electorate understand where they went "wrong".
How do you end up with anything more than malicious obedience? Just like taxes. I have no problem paying the goose that lays the golden eggs. But no more than my fair share. If my vote counts no more or less than any other person's vote, then my taxes (percentage wise) should be no more, or no less - with due consideration given to a situation where one is either physically, or mentally, incapable. And then, I owe them food, clothing, shelter, health care. Enough to live respectfully. And because I WANT to, not because I am being forced to. Big difference. If ignorance of the law is no excuse, then being a lazy ass for not earning your own way shouldn't be either.
Again, too much coffee.
推薦好站
SEO網站設計,鋼模塑膠射出,模具,模具射出廠,壓鑄模具廠,Die Casting,天珠水晶藝品,健康檢查選美兆,沉香檀香香品,命理風水,咖啡,命理風水網佈,禮品百貨,交友聯誼,美兆健康檢查Eton家,命理風水精舍天珠寺磁場,精密壓鑄,美兆說妳美美健康日誌晴,寵物狗貓動物之家,ETON旅遊情報誌,嬰兒寶寶的家庭作業,靈鷲山護法會大願隊義工廳堂,天珠寺磁場風水納福招財轉運工具寺,台灣廟宇相簿,命理算命格尚,健康佛學Blogger,禮品贈品美容,檀香沉香香品資料庫
=================================
風水命理
天珠寺命理風水精舍,胎毛筆,古董,on sale,鈦鍺,天珠,招財,戀愛,考試,貔貅,財神爺,麒麟,化煞,念珠,風水,天珠水晶,行車,美兆,1元起標,茶壼茶葉
=================================
說妳美美禮品百貨
瓷花,藤枝,原木精油(精油蝶蝶館),3C家電電子遊戲部,美容儀,保養品,面膜(美濃蜜意區),香晶泥土,沙包,環保(創意叢林洲),禮品,精品,居家擺飾(精裝品味房),脫毛膏,窈窕,內衣(美體寶貝湖),鈦鍺健康韻力房(手鍊項鍊櫃),同人誌角色扮演服飾
=================================
情趣商品
跳蛋情趣商品,保險套情趣用品,情趣老二仿真陽具,性感內衣愛用網,按摩棒情趣用品,催情潤滑液區,肛交性感網,情趣用品自拍用,AV女優愛用品,自慰按摩棒讚
節人節性感扮演，誘惑情挑，浪漫女神,DIY非電動型按摩棒,IC控制類按摩棒,無線控制按摩棒,新穎溫控設計,硬質高潮棒,軟質高潮棒，仿真男娃，高潮G點尋找,潤滑液,激情增艷類,逼真那話兒,無線跳蛋,調情跳蛋,變頻控制跳蛋棒，軟質跳蛋棒，AV名器自愛,腰娘自慰類,仿真女娃全半身,充氣娃娃,飛機杯罐,硬漢軟質套,吸引自慰式，皮飾衣裝扮，捆綁束縳,有線穿戴類,無線穿戴類,雙頭龍按摩類,穿戴按摩棒類,後庭拉珠系列,後庭塞器系列，性感扮演，羊眼環圈,套裝組合系列,口交舔吮類,情調潤滑液,按摩液類,清潔沐浴類,香水情調，情趣知識館，愛情趣商品sex購物說明
視訊做愛聊天室avdvd-情色網ut13077視訊聊天A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費Ａ片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520plus論壇sex520免費影片85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費Ａ片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaa片免費看短片aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費Ａ片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片後宮0204movie免費影片av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片免費視訊聊天jp成人sex520免費影片
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
日本免費視訊線上aa片免費看18成人圖片區情色交友色情遊戲情色視訊色情色情網站非常好色天下第一色站免費視訊辣妹色色辣妺視訊免費線上a片85cc免費影片絕色影城hinet遊戲網嘟嘟成人網h漫avhello成人電影院h大奶妹做愛影片視訊做愛百分百成人av圖片aa片免費看影片
Post a Comment
<< Home