John McCain endorses Hillary’s “good character, honesty, integrity”
John McCain is incapable of disagreeing with strict immigration enforcement activists without lambasting their character, honesty, and integrity. We’re “nativists” and Jim Crow-style racists who should just “f**k” off. He couldn’t help sneering at former GOP rival Mitt Romney’s business experience as dishonorable and greedy. And his personal vindictiveness toward GOP Hill staffers who have opposed his positions is well-known.
Contrast this treatment of people in his own party with McCain’s treatment of his supposed ideological opposite, Hillary Clinton. Yesterday, McCain was asked about his comment three years ago that Hillary would make a “good president.” If his explanation of the remarks to George Stephanopoulous is supposed to “calm down” conservatives, the McCain camp is 1) more out of touch with reality than I imagined, and 2) hurtling towards a repeat of the 1996 Dole/Kemp disaster faster than I imagined. When Hillary’s Democrat rival, Barack Obama, is doing a better job of attacking the ethically-challenged, truth-challenged, integrity-challenged Clintons than the GOP presidential front-runner, we are in deep doo-doo.
Here are the vid and transcript. Watch, read, cringe, discuss:
Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain of Arizona sat down with George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” today for a wide-ranging interview.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: You’re a superstitious man.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: Let me say that I’m the luckiest man. You know, I don’t like to use superstitious. I just feel that I’m very lucky, and I like to have things that make me luckier.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So when was the first moment you let yourself believe “I’m going to be the nominee”?
MCCAIN: I haven’t yet.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You haven’t yet?
MCCAIN: Well, I think we’ve got to go through it. I think we’ve got a very good shot at it. I’m optimistic. But I think the time to do that is when [former Arkansas] Governor [Mike] Huckabee and the party decides that I am the nominee. He’s still in the race, and he said he’s going to stay in, and I respect that. So we’ll compete.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Back in 2005, you said, “I have no doubt that Sen. [Hillary] Clinton would make a good president.”
MCCAIN: Well, look, here’s — Sen. Clinton and I are sitting next to each other, and we’re asked, “Would she,” quote, “be a good president?” She would be a good president in the respect that I think she has integrity, I think she has all of the qualities that are necessary, but she has a very different philosophical view, the liberal Democratic view, than I have, which is conservative Republican.
So when you say “good,” she’s a good person. But we have strong differences in our views of government. I think she is a very good person. I think that Sen. [Barack] Obama is a good person.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But not good presidents?
MCCAIN: They certainly wouldn’t make the kind of president that I would be or I wouldn’t be running. You see my point? It’s not a, quote, “good.” I think they would work hard. I think they would be dedicated to the things that they believe in and stand for. I just have different fundamental philosophical views than they do.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But it sounds like you wouldn’t say the same thing today?
MCCAIN: I would say that they would be good in the respect they’re people of good character, honesty, integrity, when you look at that. Would they be good from a governing standpoint? Certainly not what I would do for this country.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Bipartisan Love Fest: Barf Alert! « The Vast Global Zionist Conspiracy v 5.0
- Dave Lucas' Notes
- The TIW Blog » Blog Archive » I TOLD YOU SO! McCAIN WILL *NOT* FIGHT!
- Stop The ACLU » Blog Archive » McCain says Clinton would make a good president
- Malkin: Faster Than Feared — The McCain Mutiny
- Neocon News » Bill Clinton’s Screw My Wife* Tour
- Oblogatory Anecdotes - campaign trail quotes
- Right Wing News
- The Dan Lee Report » Blog Archive » Plagiarism? The Clinton Campaign is now showing a drowning desperation
- John McCain: Hillary Has Good Character, is Honest and Has Integrity « AmeriCAN-DO Attitude
- Michelle Malkin » McCain to staff: Hands off of Hillary
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain
Riehl World View
» Bet: Ratings Fail - Oprah/Obama Christmas Special
Mudville Gazette
» The five-year planNewsBusters.org
» Oprah To Do Primetime Christmas Special With The ObamasRiehl World View
» Dowd: Dem Elites Displeased With Obama As Palin RisesStop The ACLU
» SEALs Charged With Assault for Arresting Top TerroristPundit & Pundette
» How much did that "tent" cost?
maisy:
Are you Ombre Rose’s sister?
Texas Tiger
Thanks for the response. I am well aware of the goals of the military, having also served 20 years in the US Army. While your response could be viewed by some as a glib attempt to take a jab at me, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here.
Having served that time in the military, one gets the chance to give some thought as to what you are there fighting for. Freedom and liberty are usually at the top of the list.
And during my time in the Army, I served with a number of fine troops who were also, gasp, registered democrats. And they served for the very reasons I was there. I would never denigrate their service or question their partiotism because of their political persuasion. They were every bit as much a partiot as the republicans serving in the military.
What I am seeing here by the likes of Mr Conservative cat is people attacking others and questioning their partiotism because they do not or will not support the republican candidate. It amazes me that people will trample the very freedoms they so rightously claim to support when others do not share their views.
But it is more than a little overboard to call someone’s love of their country and willingness to commit perhaps all to their country when their views do not line up in sync with someone else’s views.
And I take it from Mr. CC’s lack of a response to my question, that he has no prior military service. That is certainly not a requirement to express an opinion, but it does impact his credibility regarding his use of terms like “Patriot” and “Great American”. It would seem that his sense of committment, duty and honor is limited to pounding a keyboard in an attempt to denigrate and bully those who hold opposing views. If those are his qualifications for membership, I for one am glad to be excluded.
One last thing I would like to point out here – it is posts like Mr. CC’s that make Michelle’s point regarding this thread. And continuing to try to defend the indefensible vitriol only reinforces those points.
McCain has done nothing to placate me on Amnesty. His shallow attempt to redefine amnesty as an act that requires no monetary penalty, an attribute not discussed in any dictionary, just reinvigorates my opinion he is a crazed liar. He has repeatedly said that has the only solution to the border crises, and that is his idiotic notion of letting every Mexican in and giving them privileges not shared by Americans. McCain is a stupid man. And like many ignorant and stupid people, he has convinced himself he is smarter than others. He is blind to the fact that all legislation that bears his name was in fact drawn up by Democrats and he was recruited, usually after some serious drinking, if rumors be true. Thus he defends his positions with foul-mouth tirades rather than facts. I suggest we believe him when he says he will try to pass his Amnesty Bill, in actuality Ted Kennedy’s Bill, again.
purplepeep:
“he was the leader and Pusher-In-Chief of the Amnesty attempt”
Not sure what you’re talkin’ bout’ there, Willis!
You are aware that “shamnesty” is the mocking term used to describe his massive amnesty bill (aka “comprehensive immigration reform”) that Americans rejected, correct?
Michelle addressed his extremely shameful illegal immigration leadership not very long ago, saying in part:
“Not all of us have forgotten how the short-fused Arizona senator cursed good-faith opponents in his own party (“F**k you!” and “Chickensh*t” were the choice words he had for Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn during a spat over enforcement provisions). Not all of us have forgotten that he voted against barring felons from receiving amnesty benefits under his plan. Not all of us have forgotten the underhanded, debate-sabotaging manner in which McCain/Kennedy/Graham/Harry Reid conspired to ram their package down voters’ throats.”
Full link HERE
Or do you mean you supported/do support some form of McCains’ “comprehensive reform”?
Purple, re: “I believe many people have made the argument that fighting a Hillary or Obama is preferable to fighting a liberal Republicans agenda.”
I don’t think so… Sanfran Nan’s peeps will fight a lib R agenda just because it’s an R agenda.
Cutting off one’s nose, to say…
Yup. You may have questioned them on political topics but didn’t use the agreements (differences) as a basis to denounce either their service to America or their personal integrity. If I’m reading you right.
I’m glad to see that ‘real’ conservatives, the real mavericks refuse to ‘get in line’, fall for the GOP establishment scare tactics, and retain their principles. To do otherwise could be viewed as being tool-like IMHO.
Here’s to hoping we get a decent third party candidate to vote for. It would take a real ‘effort’ to get someone worse than what we are being offered today.
Also, due to the mealymouthed sycophants currently bashing one of my favorite conservatives, I feel I absolutely must add, God Bless you, Michelle. Don’t let the narrow minded miscreants get you down.
Jim M:
Thank you for your gracious reply. I wasn’t trying to take a jab at ya’.
I can’t speak for Mr. CC, but I don’t think his attempt to hand out some attaboys to those who side with him equates to demeaning those whom he didn’t cite. From what I’ve read recently on several threads, I’d say he’s a passionate advocate, not a bully.
On the whole, he has received far worse than he’s dished out here. But since we’re fighting with pens and not swords maybe we all should be able to handle the occasional low blow.
Cheers.
Could be, Red – at best all anyones’ got to offer is what they “think could happen” either way.
I have CITED to you about a BOOK’S WORTH of SPECIFICS about why McCain is worse on IMMIGRATION ALONE than the entire DIM PARTY, including Toady Chappaquiddick sitting out there 2 years ago REGISTERING ILLEGALS TO VOTE IN AMERICA while they were protesting America and burning our Flag!
Not to mention how he is worse on the Judiciary issues, not to mention how he is worse than them on the MILITARY.
I don’t know where you live, but I live less than 2 hours from the Mexico border and have had to help bury NEIGHBORS who were viciously slashed to death by illegal aliens in situations having NOTHING to do with them participating in border wars, or Coyote rivals activites or drug and human smuggling operations of any kind, just AT HOME MINDING THEIR OWN BUSINESS trying to be kind to strangers.One old lady in her 80’s was alsays telling her children that if any of her grandsons were far from home, she hoped strangers would be kind to them, as well. Well, one who she had fed scrambled egg breakfast tacos came back and raped and tortured and mutilated her to death, then burned her meager shack down around her ears.
She and another couple plus their ranch foreman separate form that incident entirely were all found by their daughters, all mutilated to death.
Another old man, living rather isolated, was rumored to have a little cash laying around somewhere inside his home…. same thing.
So I guess I am pretty good at figuring out who is the worst on the issue.
1.
And is still so proud of it he could bust a gut!!!
Juan Hernandez – Jerry Perenchio – Kay Bailey Hutchison and Rick Perry…
EXCUSE YOU – I’ll side with Sheriff Joe Arpaio on this issue.
NOBODY can outstink McCain.
You guys knew how we felt when you went to McCain like moths to flames – went to him BECAUSE YOU KNEW how we felt about him.
I used to BEG the Moderates to CHOOSE WISELY if they wanted party unity.
You chose him KNOWING how we felt, and now you expect US to make it happen for you, even though you disregarded our concerns when you chose him – now expect us to consider you more than we do the health of this nation and the security of our own children.
It ain’t gonna happen.
I’ve cited a long long list of CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINTS against McCain – you have cited NOTHING by Hillary and Obama to compete with McCain’s actions.
NOTHING.
In fact, their flag-burning and voter-registration rallies HELP US RALLY THE SLEEPING CONSERVATIVES TO GET OUT AND VOTE!
2.
But like I said, I’m just thrilled that you guys are picking the pasture that suits you best.
You just cannot begin to imagine how thrilled I am about that.
That is a side benefit to McCain’s existence – but NOT one for which he needs to be rewarded with the Presidency, for.
Please speak for yourself. The GOP doesn’t own me, I owe the GOP not a single bloody thing, and if McAmnesty is on the ticket I’ll be glad to do the hard work that Real Americans always are willing to do in a heartbeat. I’ll just vote for the candidates that earn it then maybe vote for the least offensive POTUS candidate. Maybe.
As bad as Obama or Hillary scare me, the amnesty issue alone prevents me from ever voting for McCain. Giving away American is wrong, but it might as well be done by a Democrat, not that in the long run it will really matter.
Either third-party, or my friend I always write-in when there is no decent choice.
purplepeep, yup, that’s my best guess
good night yall
purplepeep
You are reading me loud and clear!
Well, Jim, looks like you come from two schools: strike first and cry foul when you get hit back and off-the-cliff-right elitism, this time defined as having served in the military.
No, I didn’t serve nor did many of my age group: ‘Nam had ended just before I was up for the draft and I had college on my mind, not military service. Does the fact that you – maybe, who knows who you are? – served in the military make you more of a patriot than anyone else? Well, you seem to think so, but quite frankly, I have no idea what you did in the military, whether you were honorable or even if, as a detached voice on the internet, you aren’t just just a liberal shill trying to scramble a conservative message board. Quite frankly, if I want to admire the iron will of fellow citizens who are doing what is right for the country in protecting it from socialists and call them “Patriots”, that’s my business and guess what? – they are patriots. Period. No question. You think you’re better or that I should believe you are just because a disembodied voice tells me they served honorably? Sorry, the stakes in this election are too high for that.
However, since you could be anybody – a 19 year old liberal activist – anybody – let’s debate this on the merits and cut the superior moral posturing before one of us starts getting sick.
I answered your question, now answer mine:
Why is having a socialist president and a socialist congress putting socialist superme court justices in place to turn the US into a Marxist state better than having an imperfect liberal president?
I’m very much interested in the straightforward bullet-points of your concise and to-the-point answer. Convince me that I’m wrong and I’ll make my voice heard in your favor. All you need to do is convince me on the facts with intellectual honesty and you win. Go.
Oh,a dn by the way,
That’s called striking back at obnoxious creeps who strike first. If that’s the degree of your machismo, you don’t sound like much of a military man to me. And cut the ad hominim attacks while you’re at it because if you were a serviceman, you don’t do your fellows proud with that BS.
Sleep well, Red!
Past my bedtime too – well, at least for tonight.
purplepeep:
Are you a Vikings fan?
I know all about his shameful immigration leadership. Rest assured, I haven’t forgotten it. I’ve simply weighed it with all the other issues in this election, including the nature of his opponents.
I can’t speak for John Cornyn. He has spoken for himself. Here’s what he said:
If the cursee can forgive the curser, so can I.
I think I made my position on border security known above. Push it south to the Tropic of Cancer. Then Pablo can work in America without leaving Chihuahua. Seriously.
Irish Rose, you are one insulting person wit little facts, just trying to pus buttons, but teh wrong ones dear. You claim we attack MCcain infairly, but you, on almost every sngle entry, attack and demean people here. Do you know us? Who the heck do you think you are, sanctimonious and playing on basic emotion, fear, IN MY OPINION. Stop personally attacking cnservatives. We attack McCain on the FACTS, have you ever heard of facts? And you can keep attacking and demeaning us, but the more you do, the less likely we are to roll over and say, yes, McCainiacs, we will vote for this rino. Keep attacking us, the more it reminds us of the type of people that support McCain.
By the way, Jimmy Carter brought us REagan. Ford, the establishment candidate, fizzled. MCCain is like him so much, and unless he acts to convince us otherwise, he will end up like Ford. I personally do not want the GOP to be blamed for the bad turn of this country. And why should we reach out to McCain when he refuses to reach out to conservatives. So, to all those insulting conservatives, right wingers, Rush, Sean, etc., grow up. Maybe you are the ones with misplaced values, not people who are willing to stick to theirs. To step intoteh shoes of Irish Rose and some others and be insulting back, some of you guys are the sell outs, the imatures. Insulting enough for McCainiacs to get it? I have had enough of this condescending behavior from some McCain supporters. No facts, just insults, fear mongering, and arm twisting. No mas.
TexasTiger,
Thank you very much, TT. At your back – it’s going to be a long slog through to November.
It does mean that it’s his service to America, along with other vets, that gave you the ability to spend time in college and call him names in a blog’s comment section, MrCC. Sounds above and beyond “patriot” to me; actions do speak louder than blustering verbage.
Irish Rose
Do you happen to remember the ad slogan for the original version of the movie “Willard”, about the kid with the trained killer rats? I think that applies here:
“Tear ‘Em Up!”
(I had lunch this past summer with Bruce Davison who played him btw – extraordinarily nice guy; aces across the board. To be filed under severely OT)
PP,
Oh Please, PP. Listening to someone strike first and then cry foul is one thing, but listening to your stoic and superior-toned defense of someone who could be anyone for all we know anyway is ad nausium even for you.
But maybe you’d like to answer his question for him, since you have invited yourself into our conversation:
Why is having a socialist president and a socialist congress putting socialist superme court justices in place to turn the US into a Marxist state better than having an imperfect liberal president?
I can’t wait for the fortune telling, worlds-greatest-political prognosticator answer.
Jim M. #296, that was beautiful!!!! Thank you for expressing it so well. I am with you brother. The more they arm twist, the more turned off I get and the more secure I become in my decision.
Texas Tiger,
I would have bought your assessment that MR CC was just a passionate advocate – until I just read his response to me.
The man attacks my credibility, now calling my service in to question as some internet fantasy. That is beyond the pale and frankly is way beyond any passionate view. If you don’t like the message, attack the messenger. He has consistently done that time and time again with a number of people here, ending up with the conclusion that they are liberal plants here.
He attempts to excuse his lack of military service by saying it was right after Vietnam. Hell, that was probably THE most difficult time to be a member of the US military. It was very unpopular, and those of us that joined after Vietnam had to have a true resolve and love of this country to face hatred of the military that was still prevalent at the time.
He states that he wants an answer to a question, but then poses the question as a “do you still beat your wife” question. He is not looking for answers, he is instigating a fight.
Tell me Texas Tiger, how would you respond to this?
Frankly, I find it amusing and probably a little sad that he finds it necessary to descend into the gutter to support his views.
I will adress one of his points. I was not trying to be macho. Not at all. Not that he would know that if it bit him in the butt. Machoism is for pretenders and people like Mr CC. Some of us walk the walk, while others talk the talk.
It does mean that it’s his service to America, along with other vets, that gave you the ability to spend time in college and call him names
You don’t agree the vets’ service to America is what enables your attacks? And your earlier life-choice of going to college over serving in the military?
For my money, their deeds trump the bombast. One takes a commitment, the other just way too much free time. I’d hold off on going Berkeley on ‘em.
All right! This reminds me of the Seinfeld episode with Kramer and the car salesman. Only 80 posts to 400! No turning back!
There’s no way I’m gonna hold yer hand til the gas tank is empty, TexT!
With my best Rodney King impression. Can’t we all just get along?
Then I’d offer up some lame diversionary sop along the lines of “Hey, look on the bright side. If McCain is elected President, then Arizona will get a better Senator.”
purplepeep:
Empty? We’re going below the line! (insert Howard Dean scream)
That’s the best you can do when someone challenges you on the ISSUES???
Oh, of course it is – you are trying to promote McCain.
You got nothing else!
Let me clarify – how would you respond if that were directed at you on a public forum?
Still convinced that he is merely being “passionate”?
You’re a wanton thrill-seeker, you are!!
How many here, will not regret NOT voting this time? After Tom Tancredo dropped out there is NO candidate worthy of my vote, in my humble opinion, ofcourse…
Yeah, Janet Napolitano.
Funny how you keep proving us right.
I’d kill ‘em with kindness. No BS. I’d respond like my friends and family were watching and then do my best to make them proud.
Be the gentleman you are.
Ombre:
Nuh, uh.
But think, how much SAFER they feel saying this baloney on the internet than actually knocking on the door of a Conservative and doing something awesomely stupid, say, like, trying to tell my BnL that he just HAS to vote for McCain, with the same arguments they are using ONLINE.
I’d love to see THAT little “conversation”, hehehehehe
I gawr-own-tee!!! Yeeee dawggies!!!
Good point. I suppose the method is immaterial as long as the end result is the same….;)
I feel so good when I read the real conservatives left on this blog that will stick to principle. Everytime I even consider possibly voting for McCain, he does or says something to show me why I am against him in the first place. My stomach just won’t allow it, you know, that little thing that God put in us called conscience. Now, if he were the true conservative he claims, he would do and say things to move me in his direction. Anyway, SOME GOOD NEWS: A friend drove to New Mexico from TX and at the states’ border, he was asked if he was a citizen and they checked his truck for illegals. They were apparently checking all cars. Thank God something is being done. Now I wish TX will pass a law similar to AZ’s law (that was passed no thanks to McShamnesty). Good night to all.
~~~NUH UH!!!~~~
McCain knows we hate his stinking guts, and he remembers too well about Robert Dole. And Gerald Ford.
He will NOT resign until he has been INAUGURATED for something better!
Great post!
No, Ombre! You sound like you’re weakening. Don’t give in. McCain must not be inaugurated.
Lord please forgive me and may God bless the Pygmies in New Guinea.
THANKS! I’m glad you caught it and knew what it was supposed to BE! LOL!
Thank you very much, I’ll take that “spot”.
Nice thought about taking over Mexico instead of letting them take US over – but you know, pragmatically speaking, that just isn’t going to happen. Even if it IS the smart thing to do.
So, if it’s inconsistencies you are trying to point out….
You cannot get around the issues of McCain like THAT, with ME – I happen to live less than 2 hours from the Mexico border, just north of the Texas area already flooded with Reconquistas.
You might fool some Yankees with talk like that, but you can’t pull the wood over this country girl’s eyes with this hornswaggle… if you don’t mind me calling the kettle black, that is.
Returning to check this thread after a long day away to find out that it resembles nearly all of the other threads on this topic… same group of stubborn howlers, the same bullying behaviors, the same people still taking personal offense, the same people screaming that they will never ever ever EVER VOTE FOR THAT MAN!!!!
And of course the ever present CAPS OF DOOM!
No thanks. I rather prefer spending my energy on intelligent discussion with people who are actually grounded in reality.
Jim, Post #319
And Purple peep, #320
Honest to God I don’t know which one of you is funnier.
I have to get some sleep, but rest assured I’ll be here tomorrow to lay my posts down right after yours (it’ll be a fun morning!):
Jim: you do the biggest imitation of a strike-first-and-then-cry-foul-when -someone-strikes-back-cry-baby I ever heard in my life. awwww… is that an insult? Well don’t insult others first, smart-ass.
If you were to ask me that, I’d say, “that’s what you get for being an insulting pr*ck by striking first at someone who never said a word to you . Boo hoo hoo. Cry me a river, jerk.” Sheesh, what a dope.
By the way, it’s cute how you casually slipped in “I’ll address one of his points” – you sly old dog you – without addressing the really relevant question – the one the hyperactive McCain-bashers can’t answer.
PP,
I don’t attack, I hit back when attacked. The problem with smarmy little snits like you is you’ve owned the internet through aggression for so long that you no longer recognize the difference. Just ask Texas tiger…. but you don’t want to do that, do you? Uh-uh, that just spoils everything, doesn’t it?
I agree. You want to save your country from socialists? Quite the bombast and pull the lever to defeat them. The operative word here is “Duh”.
Now for the moment of truth: the question no McCain basher can answer and the one our strike-first-and-then-cry-foul, boo hoo hoo McCain bashers Jim and Purple peep danced cowardly away from. Do me a favor, answer this question, please:
Why is having a socialist President and a socialist congress putting socialist supreme court justices in place to turn the US into a Marxist state better than having an imperfect liberal-Republican President?
Go ahead. Tear me apart. Slice and dice me with the surgical precision of your thoughtful and extraordinarily well-reasoned answer. If you’re right it will be clear and plain. Everyone will see it. I’ll agree. The majority here who have committed themselves on this board will change their positions and from your point-of-view you’ll be improving our nation and the lives of everyone within it. Go ahead. Feeling as strongly as you do, surely you must be able to answer a question which must be at the very core of your thinking. You both passed on it the first time around though you both had plenty of time to posture ad infinitum, but I guess you wanted to spare me the humiliation of your concise answer. Well don’t. Please. You’re never to old to learn. Tear me apart with your answer. Show me and everyone I call a patriot here the error of our ways. The answer to this question does it. Just keep it simple and uncomplicated so we shallow thinkers can understand it, okay?
Go….!
Oh, Texas Tiger, NO! You totally misread me.
ALL I was speaking to is McCain’s intentions NOT TO GIVE US A LOOPHOLE BY WHICH WE MIGHT TRICK HIM TOTALLY OUT OF ANY POLITICAL OFFICE AT ALL!
I am NOT – I REPEAT – NOT! NOT, NOT, NOT!!! – NO WAY IN HADES am I suggesting that McCain be actually inaugurated for ANYTHING (pleasant, that is)! OH, H. E. DOUBLE HOCKEY STICKS NO!
NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
I’m just saying, McCain isn’t going to let any Conservatives trick him out of the office he HAS on the PROMISE of another.
He is way too crooked to fall for THAT old gag. He was prolly instrumental in dreaming it up and propagating it in the first place.
It only ever works on foolish old naive Conservatives, anyway.
Old and foolish he is – Conservative HE IS NOT, WAS NOT, AND NEVER WILL BE!
Hey Irish,
That was meant as a joke. I’m on your side, remember?
So true. What’s interesting is they somehow try to seem like they don’t want to influence others. But if that were true, then they’d only have to say it once, right?
LOL. Wonderful.
Your rhetoric is far from passionate – it is borderline psychotic. Seriously. You really need to get some help.
You have posed no “really relevant questions” and have crossed the line from advocacy and into the twilight zone. As I pointed out before, you are not looking for answers, you are spoiling for a fight. And calling people “Pricks” and mocking them because they call you to task on your rhetoric is the boorish behavior of a small mind.
Do you actually believe that your behavior here is helping McCain? With supporters like you, McCain has no chance.
You may want to give some pause before you commit your thoughts into written words, because your rants here make it look like you are losing your grip on reality.
Ombre Rose:
You throw out a lot of wild stories about vicious slashings, torture, mutilation, burning, etc. in your angry open borders rhetoric, Ombre.
Some of them you’ve posted multiple times, and almost word for word.
I wonder if you might be able to offer up some archived documentation of these events?
TexasTiger:
Still want to stick by that defense? The attack that was savaged upon your posse member consisted of questions regarding his definition of “partiot” and whether he served in the military. Those questions were posed to reinforce the point that patriots include both democrats and republicans, as well as conservative and moderate republicans.
Now, I realize that I may not be the most sensitive person in the world, but I did not view such questions and the follow up note on the attacks against others on this very thread as overly viscious. Despite my views, the response was thermonuclear. While I have engaged in more than a few passionate debates, I do not recall resorting to terms like “coward”, “prick”, “traitor” or “cry baby” (although it is possible that in my early youth I did invoke the “liar, liar, pants on fire” counterattack).
Care to change your client’s plea, or do you wish to take the fifth?
I should have just called it a night, but no, knowing what a couple of people can be like, some morbid sense of curiosity drove me back for a peek, and Jim responsed like a pro. I was not disappointed:
…
Gee, thanks for the heads-up, Jim. I’ll be sure to tell that to my family, lifelong friends, clients and subcontractors. After all, you know me so well.
Are you sure that you’re not taking mind-reading lessons from Purple Peep?
In the meantime, you run away from my presumed “irrelevent question” while doing what all McCain bashers do: engage in first-strike ad hominum attacks. You’re fooling no one, school boy, trust me – the posts that are read here are not read in a societal vacuum. We get it.
LOL. I see. But calling them pricks because they strike first and then cry foul like you’re doing is okay, then. Which is fine because that’s what I did. It’s good that we understand each other.
Oooh, I better back down, let you strike first and apologize for not being a better target. Get real. Sheesh.
Oh dear me yes, I certainly must do everything you so suggest with such quiet sincereity. In the meantime, answer my question since I answered yours so we can cut through all this horsesh*t and get to the point:
Why is having a socialist President and a socialist congress putting socialist supreme court justices in place to turn the US into a Marxist state better than having an imperfect liberal-Republican President?
Personally, I think you can’t. But by all means, cut the half-baked corny – and hilariously “somber” – psychoanalysis and prove me wrong by answering the question.
No matter what I do I feel quite confident that the one thing you won’t do is answer the question because you can’t. It;s such a no-branier for any conservative that the fact that you even say by inference that you’ll do the latter posed in the question and not the former is a big red flag for anyone with common sense – with an emphasis on the red.
And stop the whing about being victimized. Next time be polite when you address someone for the first time and you won’t have to worry about it. File that under “D” for “Duh”.
How about filing it under “D” for Deranged.
Seriously, you need to get a grip.
Jim
Still want to stick by that defense?
It was? You could have fooled me. What attack, by the way? Texas Tiger, do you have any idea what the hell this guy is talking about?
Oh brother. You need to grow a thicker skin, Jimmy. Politics is a tough business. This is no world for shrinking violets. If you want love, stay home.
If the shoe fits, wear it. next time you think you can start a conversation with an insult and skate way, maybe you’ll think better of it.
Can anyone here spell D-E-F-E-N-S-I-V-E?
Oh yes, and that question,. Do answer it when you have the chance. Think of it this way: if I make a big fuss about it and you answer it terrifically, that’ll really “put me in my place”. So why not stop wasting time by blathering about everything else and answer it?
What a quinessential advocate for McCain.
So perfect in EVERY way.
Feb 7 – Nov 7 … 9 months…tick tock…tick tock…tick tock…
Gee, Jimmy, if you say do then it must be true. But about that question….! I’m hitting the hay, so you’ll have all night to think up a really good intellectually dishonest evasion.
Hey Ombre, it’s a good question, You answer it too. I’ll see your CAPS rant about it in the morning. Nighty-night.
And to the true patriots on this board who will do whatever it takes to keep the socialists out of power, no matter how distasteful, God Bless!
You need no help from me in “putting you in your place”. You have done a stellar job on your own.
You have posed no question. None. You have, however, structured a mechanism that paints anyone attempting to respond with an answer contrary to your own thoughts as a socialist or a marxist. Do you really believe people are that stupid? You must, otherwise you would not continue to persist in trying to get people to respond to your inane rant.
You really do need some help, and I hope you get it.
On February 19th, 2008 at 12:20 am, Irish Rose said:
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
The reason they are almost word for word every time is because these events happened to people that I know. I know their children and grandchildren.
I am not going to provide documentation for you because Michelle has been doing so about similar events, and so has Sean Hannity, that these events are real and commonplace.
Besides, these are real people, I know them personally – they are not paper dolls cut out of magazines for you to play with.
I am not going to, further, because I have no intention whatsoever of giving more hints than I have of exactly where I am.
And since the events that Michelle and others have reported in the National News have no influence at all on McCainiacs, I see no reason to throw my area of the country into the wood chipper for political fodder.
These families have been through more than enough, already.
And we have seen no political response that is reasonable enough and thorough enough to prove to us they are nearly as interested in the welfare of American citizens as they are in the VOTING POWER of ILLEGAL ALIENS ON “ENTITLEMENT” PROGRAMS funded by UNREPRESENTED American citizens.
Nothing you McCain supporters have said or done, shows you have any interest in the lives and deaths of these folks.
I recount a small piece of the effects on local people of these “grand schemes” of your Socialist politicians for one purpose only.
I want you to believe me when I say that you do NOT have deep enough support for this donkey’s rear end to get him ELECTED in November – because those of us out here in the REAL WORLD are not the least bit impressed with what you CLAIM are the “big differences” between McCain and REGISTERED Democrat Socialists.
And we have bigger incentive to hold our stand than you can give us to entice us to change our position to yours.
You need to know that.
Even if you do not comprehend it.
Now, it is really nice of you to tell your sister she needs to “save her marriage” and to go cook a decent meal for her loving husband who just beat the living tar out of her, because secretly, you don’t want to be bothered letting her sleep on your couch with her 6 kids.
But those tactics just aren’t going to work on American Citizens who hate everything John McCain represents.
You’ve nominated him – you live with it.
I told ever single comment thread that has mentioned him in 10 years exactly what would happen – “GERALD FORD/ROBERT DOLE” – every single solitary time his name was brought up – just because his SCANDALS in Washington DC have given him “NAME RECOGNITION”.
You asked for it, enjoy.
I wouldn’t bail you out if I had the means to do it.
I have thoroughly answered the questions about why I refuse to vote for McCain.
You have posed no other question except to pretend nobody has answered that.
Well, lots of people have answered it definitively.
You have not, however, presented any just cause whatsoever why anyone SHOULD vote for McCain. Why anyone should feel it is ADVANTAGEOUS to the USA for anyone on EARTH to vote for Mc Cain. Whatsoever!
Anti-Dim Party won’t do – since McCain authors all the really poisonous Liberal legislation which they have passed. the Dim Party simply wouldn’t know what to do wi thout McCain to dream it up for them.
Besides, we owe you NO ANSWER WHATSOEVER for the disposition of our vote.
The GOP and McCain owe US every effort to WIN our votes – but WE have NO OBLIGATION to give them so much as a “KISS MY GRITS”.
No obligation to McCain or the GOP.
THE PARTY SYSTEM of election politicians IS NOT EVEN IN THE CONSTITUTION.
And the Constitution says WE THE PEOPLE are the SOLE REPOSITORS of the POWER of Government.
We are NOT rolay subjects and MCCain and the GOP DO NOT OWN US.
And they have not done a cotton picking thing to put us under ANY debt of ANY KIND WHATSOEVER.
So take your DEMANDS that we justify our VOTES to YOU and stuff them all where the sun don’t shine and rotate yourself at 425 horsepower.
And while you are at it, take your little donkey McCain and attach his harness to one of the spokes.
To the CIVILIZED portion of this board:
I am terribly sorry, my deepest apologies. Please forgive me for all my “French” in the above post.
I know we have more than 8 months to go.
My profound apologies.
…didn’t inhale…
hehehehehe [close my mouth!]
hehehehe
The idea that border crime is now verbotten is interesting. Illegals commit on a per capita basis 6 times the crime of the base population. But on the border itself, I have no doubt that Mexico and various criminals (is there any difference now?) are attempting to depopulate the American border by terror, rape, murder, and robbery. And, frankly, I believe Bush is generally aware of this and approves, as does McCain. After all, the suffering of a few, is no doubt less important than the long term goal of unlimited cheap labor.
Oh, I will VOTE. I NEVER stay home. I VOTE!
The question is WHO SHALL I WRITE IN.
Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Franklin Graham, David Limbaugh…
Oh, I promised one of the posters here, yesterday I would vote for him!
That will do just as well.
The Election officials have to have separate charts for write-in votes, they have to list each name separately, and how many votes each of them got, tally each of those and all of them, and add that to the totlas they have to pass up the line to area, district, state and national Secretaries’ offices, throughout the night – all before they get to go home and call it a night.
Then the party officials at grassroots levels get a copy of the write-ins so they can see if the names written there tell them any insights on the voters they failed to win over.
I want to pick a name that gives them pause.
I want to inspire others to do write-ins so the sheer numbers also give them pause.
So Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck just won’t do. But they are a few miles of improvement over the likes of the “official candidates” we are left with at this point, from all the parties.
I could really go for a Jerry Mouse and Speedy Gonzales, and Roadrunner.
So that guy down around Houston who shot those two illegal alien house-breakers, who the media ranted about so, but the dead bodies were only 7-10 feet from that man’s front door! “Running away!”
That might send a message.
Attention, commenters. Please note:
Repeat violations of my terms of use like the passage quoted above (and there are plenty more like it littering this thread) will not be tolerated.
If you want to use constant profanity to make your arguments, get your own blog.
I have never in my life considered not voting. I believed that to do so was a cop out of our democratic duties. Likewise, to not vote Republican was to hand the keys to the kingdom to the greater evil.
But I have some serious thinking to do now. From contemplating posts like this I have come to believe that if McCain obtains high office he may do significant and persistant damage to the GOP and conservative ideals during the course of his Presidency. I can not believe that I am beginning to think that McCain as President would be worse than having Hillary or Obama. And that conservatives must organize against him and vote to stop him from foisting the tragedy his administration would bring upon our country and our party.
In the face of this logical conclusion the question I must reluctantly consider is whether it is better to not vote and help to deny a mandate to the winner or to vote Republican but to write in a true conservative candidate. I have always thought that write ins were dissmissed demographicly as kooks, but if enough Republicans were to vote against McCain they may not be ignored. I doubt it would be viable to organize an anti-McCain write in campaign. Still I wonder at what percentage of votes it would send a clear message?
Maybe it is time that we seriously start setting our sites on who the GOP should nominate in 2012. If we can get public discourse started now conservatives may be able to save the Republican pary from irrelevance.
Also, in the meantime, in the years in-between there are good local conservative candidates who will be up for election.
Amen…and amen.
Hellofadeal…
but here we are.
Personally, I’d like to try to do all that I possibly can to assure that I…or my sons and daughters…are never put in this kind of nut-cracker again.
I’ve been called an “ideological purist”…with a few modifiers in the bargain…on these threads.
I guess, given the source of those comments, I’ll accept that as sort of a complement, but…
I just think “idealist” is a more accurate appellation. I’ve been an idealist for a long time. I really do believe in conservative, Constitutional values. I do believe in people, and their ability to govern themselves. I believe in their right to do that, even to the point of destroying what the Framers gave us, if that is what enough of them are inclined to do.
One of the things that makes me saddest about this strait we’re in is that I understand the impulse of many here to “hold their noses”…I’ve voted that way before…even mostly.
But this time is materially different.
I’m not so much faulting people with a different POV, as calling on them to consider stuff maybe they haven’t, and what their basic motives are…like being afraid instead of having faith that the Framers gave us a much more durable nation than the one that would fall apart if we didn’t elect a guy with “R” (inappropriately) beside his name.
We have a system that…for fundamental reasons…isn’t good for a multi-party political arrangement. A third party will never (barring some cataclysm) be viable. That means I’m left with the GOP, essentially, as the place I find common cause. That place needs some reform, or I will be an alien there…essentially without a political home.
They have to know that this state of affairs is utterly unacceptable to me and those like me, who have made a VERY important contribution to this nation over the last three or four decades. I have an obligation to tell them.
That’s all…
On February 19th, 2008 at 1:20 am, Jim M. said:
Uh, WTF? He’s been asking the same question halfway down the thread, word for word in bold. And still no answer from you. I guess we know why.
Ah, no direct answer and now the usual defensive posture
…and counterattack.
This is getting old, Jim.
You think you’re such a clever conversationalist, don’t you Jim? You’re nothing of the sort. There are some here, myself included, who happen to know something about the psychology of bullies and cyberbullies in particular. We can see right through your act, so you might as well cut the crap.
The same goes for the rest of the cyber-mob here who clearly work together in tandem (including nyc123 up there, who – for some odd reason – seems very keen to find out what I do for a living).
Regarding that question that you claim that CC has never asked, Jim: you don’t honestly think that people here aren’t capable of seeing through your evasiveness, do you?
Oh, and the jab at CC about “military service”? He knows exactly what you meant, and so do I.
Still waiting for you to answer the question, Jim.
Ombre Rose:
Sorry, your limp excuse doesn’t fly with me.
I’m not asking you to give specifics about where you live, although its’ not hard to pin down as you state repeatedly that you live two hours from the border.
I’m simply asking you to show us that these events actually occurred. These are criminal activities that would involve both law enforcement personnel, and individuals who are authorized by the US Government to provide relevant information for the purpose of criminal investigation. These horrific events would certainly be covered by local news sources, at the very least.
If these events actually happened, there would be ample documentation to support them.
Personally? I don’t believe that you can provide that documentation.
Therefore your emotional and hate-filled cut and paste rants about throat slashings, etc. on which many of your posts are based, don’t hold a lot of water with me.
Of course I anticipate a hostile response from you, probably with caps.
To that I will say in advance… prove me wrong, and I’ll publicly apologize for doubting you.
Good morning, Michelle.
And one more thing, Ombre:
You have a sick habit of using domestic violence verbiage to try and make a point.
Some of us actually had to live with that kind of thing. I did, for 20 years and I’m a PTSD patient. I really don’t need to have this type of violent verbiage thrown into my face on casual discussion threads.
Your analogies are extremely offensive, and I respectfully request that you cease and desist.
On February 19th, 2008 at 5:14 am, purplepeep said:
True, PP.
But what would you propose that we do about our troops on the ground overseas in the meantime? They have a job to finish, and they must be allowed to finish it. They’re not in a position to suspend the war for four years, while purist conservatives angle for a candidate who “listens to them”.
And the liberal judges that are going to be given lifetime appointments over the next four years? We simply step aside and do nothing to prevent that?
And the millions of unborn children who will die because “real conservatives” chose to look dreamily into the future and ignore the realities of the here-and-now when Roe v. Wade is on the cusp of being overturned?
I could go on about the changes to our government structure (socialized medicine, etc.), unimpeded tax-and-spend policies for pork projects, and the dangerous terror-appeasing foreign policies that are going to be implimented very quickly during wartime by a Dem majority and a Dem POTUS.
They won’t need long to accomplish all of this and they will probably do so before the next election cycle. And if they can’t get it all done, they’ll cause so much damage to our fabric that we’ll never be able to put it right again.
We simply can’t afford the luxury of burying our heads in the sand to make it all go away, pp. There is far too much at stake.
Wellllll. I go bed in a Seinfeld episode and wake up in the sewers of Jerusalem in Life of Brian.
Why do I get the feeling lgm ands sausage are reading this dressed as Roman soldiers and laughing their arses off?
Which begs the question, Rags… what kind of reform are you referring to here? The type that leans more towards the right, or the reform that leans more towards moderation?
The recent stats released by the Pew Research Foundation would seem to indicate that the majority of Republicans in this country recognize the need for political moderation and more bipartisan cooperation in Washington, and would prefer that the party move more towards the center.
Not all the way to the center of course, but certainly away from the far-right.
The same seems to be true of moderate Democrats, who are sick and tired of being “disenfranchised” dictated to, and ignored by the purist liberal moonbat contingent.
I see a trend in this country towards moderation for the sake of bipartisan cooperation, Rags. People are sick and tired of angry, infantile gridlock in Washington and they can see that nothing is being accomplished because elected officials for the most part are no longer interested in working together or reaching across the aisle to find workable solutions.
On February 19th, 2008 at 8:52 am, TexasTiger said:
You sayin’ that lgm and sausage like Gladiator movies? Hmmmm.
Eccch.
Speaking of movies…
If November were Dracula , the voters were Van Helsing, McCain were the wooden stake and Oh!b♥m♥/Clint♂n were Dracula…
The anti-McCaniacs would fear the stake more than they fear Dracula.
If November were The Wizard of Oz, the voters were Dorothy, McCain were the bucket of water and Oh!b♥m♥/Clint♂n were the Wicked Witch…
The anti-McCaniacs would fear the bucket more than they fear the witch.
I’m just getting started. Hoooo-ah!
Not the Pew Research Foundation, the Pew Research Center. My bad.
/more coffee
Which of course is a good reason for a conservative to not be a republican. The so call moderates are the globalist who use American resources to carry out their global ambitions. They love Iraq and hate protecting the border.
Which of course produces more of the greater evil within your own party.
The remainder of your post certainly illuminates your position on the political map, doesn’t it, Rose?
Quoting a Pew study of where Republicans wish their party was…?? Curious, indeed… Rather like quoting Pravda on Cold War American foreign policy, isn’t it?
But to answer the question you posed–
I favor the kind of reform that would give us a solid conservative.
Simple. See, I don’t think of conservatism as “extreme”, or “far-right”, or in need of “moderation”. I don’t adopt the terminology of my Leftist opponents.
I favor the reforms that would not result in the LEAST admired…MOST divisive…man in the Republican Party gaining the GOP presidential nomination. The same man who has shown his very weak ties to the Party by twice in this decade considering a switch…an OFFICIAL switch…not just voting with them.
I favor the reforms that would give us a candidate with a prayer of winning the general, which I assert again McCain does not have.
I find it instructive that you deplore “angry, infantile gridlock in Washington”.
As a Conservative (yes, a TRUE conservative) I frequently find myself standing and cheering when Washington gridlocks on for instance, the SHAMNESTY affront…
I wish to hell that Washington were MORE gridlocked, and less lubricated with PORK FAT.
Thank you for finally revealing your moderate stripe.
It is useful in assessing your support of McCain in context with the conservative noises you have made.
Irish Rose,
Suggesting that someone seek help is bullying? Did you bother to read those rants?
As for the “question”, you know, or should know, that that is not a question. The query was posed to eleicit an admission that one either agreed with McCain, or was in fact a socialist or Marxist.
I have stated the purpose of my question regarding military service – that was all there was to it. Period. To try to read more into it is pure fantasy.
I did not comment on anything you said here, so I am more than a little confused as to the necessity for piling on here. Do you really support all of MR CC’s commentary?
I understand you may have some issues, so I will pass on more forcefully addressing your comments.
People are entitled to their views. It is a freedom that your son, God Bless him, is fighting for today.
Wow, I see that Irih Rose and now Mr. CC have not stopped their insults towards some very lucid, reasonable and what I see as real conservatives. How do McCain pushers ever immagine that with insults that are completely not fact based, just beligerent, you will cause anyone to vote for McCain. On the contrary, you just reaffirm our positions that McCain is not our candidate and that many of the peole who follow him have no respect at all for any real conservative or people that disagree with them- sounds a lot like liberals; oh wait, McCain IS a liberal. So, this is still a free country where my vote is my own and I have, especially after reading this thread, made a SOLID decision that I will NEVER vote for McCAin, come what may.
By the way, I wonder if McCain would agree to take down the fence/wall around his Cottonwood AZ property so that the people can come on in, you know, they just want to experience how the other half live? Maybe he needs to lead by example and either have no fences or simply put an invisible virtual fence around. Maybe Bush needs to do the same around his TX property. Why the need for fences? They don’t work based on those people, so they should not have any either.
The case for more and more evangelical conservatives leaning more towards the center than the right… here’s what it comes down to.
Does John McCain Need Evangelical Voters? (Pew Research Center, Feb. 8th)
So we see here that John McCain has more support from white evangelicals going into the election (3%), than George Bush has right now. And more white evangelicals disapprove of President Bush (40%), than they do John McCain (28%). Evangelicals who lean towards moderation are much more consistent than those who lean toward the right and far-right.
Keep in mind here that these stats reflect the views of WHITE EVANGELICALS ONLY.
But here’s the kicker from the linked article:
Oh, how the “agents of intolerance” comment has stuck in the craw of superstar evangelical leaders and taken root over the years… and oh, how gullible the evangelicals in this country have become to the ungodly retaliatory political manipulation emanating from their leaders.
I’m a Christian myself, but I have an extreme distaste for evangelical leaders who turn their pulpits over to politicans, or become politicans or political activists themselves and use their pulpits to manipulate gullible congregants.
Moderate evangelicals are very consistent, and they are a lost cause to self-aggrandizing evangelical leaders with an agenda. A small contingent of purist evangelicals will never be swayed towards moderation… and they are the ones who are exploited, whipped up and sent out to convert the 15 percent or so who can be swayed.
I ask you, is there any difference between the carefully couched political manipulation of the masses from radical Imams on Friday afternoons, and the carefully couched political manipulation of the masses from evangelical leaders like Robertson, Falwell and Dobson on Sunday mornings?
Not from where I sit.
On February 19th, 2008 at 10:31 am, Jim M. said:
Wow, you’re a real piece of work aren’t you?
I read the rants. A lot more profanity than was necessary, but they were spot on.
As for the question, it’s a legitimate question. And your refusal to answer it is based on evasive cowardice, as you know very well that CC is quite capable of tearing your response to shreds.
Keep going Irish ROse, keep insulting. WOW. Do you actually work for B.O. or Hillary? Your rants are one way to solidify the anti-McCain sentiment. I guess I am one of those evangelicals who do not have favorable opinions of McCain, whatever that vague and undefined term by some unreliable poll means (recall polls in CA and other states? exit polls in 2004?, etc.). Hillary has favorable views by about 50% of peole too. What does that mean? Issues, issues issues, that is what counts and when the votes are actually counted, the evangelicals AIN’T voting for McCain in very large numbers.
Rags:
I find it amazing that you are only now catching on, since I’ve mentioned that I’m a moderate conservative Christian a number of times now.
Hello?
You all may find this helpful…
In response to Mr. CC’s transparent attempt to force the debate on McCain into a cattle chute of his design, I sent this—
On February 16th, 2008 at 6:57 am, Ragspierre said:
We know the Democrats are weak on terror.
Yes. We know that McCain is even more dangerously “weak on terror”, as well.
We know that, by virtue of his POW credentials, he carries weight that no Dimocrate carries. That is why they love him so when he trashes America to Der Speigal, for instance, and why they wave McCain’s bloody shirt when “torture” is an issue. He’s their most powerful tool.
McCain is bellicose…he supports the war in Iraq. But at the same time, he supports those who oppose the larger GWOT in many different ways that materially undermine its prosecution,
not just now but in the future.
True or false.
If we won the war in Iraq, but lost the war along our borders, would we have won the larger GWOT?
Yes or No, please.
We know that republicans staying home or voting for a third party candidate”out of conscience” is more likely to get a democrat elected than would be otherwise true if those Republicans voted the Republican ticket (”Duh” is the operative word you’d understand, ragsy).
I understand the word “tautology”. I also understand the term “Hobson’s Choice” (look it up). I further understand that rewarding awful performance will get you more, and more awful, performance that is awful.
True or False. (Duh.)
If you don’t vote the Republican ticket, and a Democrat wins, and that liberal democrat, soft on terrorism and big on blame-America-first rhetoric,…
i.e., McCain…the guy who has twice in this decade flirted with BEING a Dimocrate,
True or false, please.
is soft on terrorism and big on blaming America (see his interview in Der Speigal)
After educating yourself, answer TRUE or FALSE, please.
…oversees policies and positions that weaken us,…
You mean like—
1.McCain-Lieberman
2.opposes any interrogation method that makes a murderous pirate uncomfortable, putting that on moral parity with torture
3.fosters putting the murderous pirate on moral and legal parity with American citizens accused of crime
4.fosters bringing the murderous pirate (and his bud, who will want to spring him) onto American soil
5.is counseled by a more-Mexican-than-not cat who thinks our southern border is sort of a silly, slightly insulting, “line in the sand”
6.who is an enemy of markets, and leaving people free to interact with each other in commerce, but
7.is very friendly to BIG GOVERNMENT, more taxes, and much more regulation
Please select any of the above you assert is false, but EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.
…a dirty bomb is exploded in a major city and 80,000 innocent lives are lost…
You mean because, like, nobody could use any technique available because John POW McCain outlawed it, and so we never got the intell? That kind of scenario?
- could you -knowing that contributed to the loss of life that otherwise would more likely have been prevented, be able to look yourself in the mirror and say “I did the right thing and I’d do it again.”
My answer: As between McCain, and any fellow traveler put forward by the Dimocrate Party, I see no essential difference, except that the Dimocrate would be weaker and more easily opposed. So my answer is
YES! I did not vote for a FALSE label. I was not duped, and I didn’t suspend rational thought because I was afraid my country could not sustain my vote of conscience.
Geez, dude. Give me a hard question.
Rose,
No such thing. A contradiction in terms. Hello…!!!
Sorry. Words mean things.
On February 19th, 2008 at 10:45 am, RealImmigrantChick said:
Re: the Pew Research Center polls, you’re kidding right?
Another forecast from your crystal ball, eh?
No, dear. It was certainly not a legitimate question…
and the tactics employed by you and others are neither my idea of “Christian”, courageous, or even persuasive.
As for your “wing-man”, he cannot respond to reasoned argument EXCEPT by name-calling and junior high bully tactics, as demonstrated over and over.
He was called for it by our very kind host.
On February 19th, 2008 at 10:55 am, Ragspierre said:
Only to someone like you, who isn’t capable of seeing any farther than the end of their own nose.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but those on the far right don’t own the religion of Christianity any more than they own the base of the Republican party.
I won’t try and dissuade you from entertaining such a delusional fantasy, however. Its’ still a free country.
Hello All,
I left last night to go home and rest my eyes from all the internecine bloodshed happening on Michelle’s blog yesterday. I see when I checked it again this morning that the civil war continued unchecked.
Here’s a thought to Rags, Ombre, and the anti-McCain crew: you say you respect the other side but your posts say otherwise. I haven’t felt the respect from your side of the argument even when I said that I respected Conservatives who would either not vote, do a fill in the blank, or vote Obama.
You think that not voting this election or not voting for McCain will help repair the GOP then I have this to say to you: you’re wrong. The GOP is already in disrepair as evidenced in the mid-term elections of 2006. It needs new blood and if you feel as virulently as you do then RUN FOR OFFICE.
I have my issues with McCain. I was a Rudy supporter and when he bowed out I supported Romney. When Romney bowed out, I reluctantly decided to support McCain. I haven’t liked anyone running in the primaries so I already had that glum feeling of disatisfaction.
I hate that McCain is a slimey, changeable politician but that’s what he is (as is most of the Washington establishment including Hillary and Obama). I have not forgotten his shamnesty crusade and was one of those petitioning for its defeat. However, Obama and Hillary are no better. I still support McCain because at least he supports the military (even if fellow conservatives think otherwise).
I’ve also had my problems with Pres. Bush. I’ve stood by him as the rest of the rats in the country jumped ship. I’ve had my problems with his spending, his war policy, and his big government giveaways (yes, Rags, that’s right). I’ve supported him because he supported my military husband. This morning, I feel a lot like the African country Tanzania that Pres. Bush is visiting. Stuck in the middle of the feuding alliances of the GOP, Dems, and American people in general.
I would like to turn the vitriole on those who are already pouring acid into the open wound that is the GOP right now. Ombre, Rags, Jim, etc. You have attacked others (including me) or did I just imagine it? It’s not very sporting nor is it very mature and people like me and Conservative Cat have had to defend ourselves. Should we take it because, dear God, we brooked your disapproval?
There’s something else I want to say as well. There have been conservatives who actively sabotaged the Iraq War (a conflict my husband and other friends currently are supporting). One of those “conservatives” goes by the name of Ron Paul. Others have used the war as an excuse (which is shameful) to attack the troops. I’ve had people tell me they support the troops (to my face not even knowing I was a military spouse) while engaging in contradictory activities. I don’t expect any who disagree with me to understand.
Given the level of rage on this blog, it is very evident that the party is deeply fractured. Reagan would be ashamed as would John Wayne, a great hero of mine growing up (I used to be a tomboy who watched westerns with my Dad). It breaks my heart so what I have to say now is not only painful, but, well, realistic: If you no longer agree with anything the party stands for, just leave it. Declare your political freedom and become an independent. You will have no ties then, nothing holding you back.
I’ve been thinking about becoming an independent for a very long time. As a conservative, I’ve felt that the GOP hasn’t represented my interests even during Pres. Bush’s administration. I want smaller government, less taxes, borders enforced, illegals immediately deported, a strong military, conservative judges, etc. I do not think that Obama of Hilly care about my interests just those of the “disenfran-
chized,” discontented populace.
I can see now that many conservatives (perhaps even Michelle and ya know I love ya girl), can’t see past their own personal animus to look at the bigger picture. Perhaps, there’s really no bigger picture for you but there is for me. I might not get the conservative Republican candidate I wanted, but it’s better than just giving in to the Dems.
I know McCain for what he truly is. I have no illusions as to his character or his ambition. I am a pragmatic conservative not just turning my back and conceding. Mine is a reluctant choice (as is my husband’s). Pres. Bush has greatly disappointed both of us in terms of how stretched the military has become, his spending. However, he has lowered our tax burden, appointed two conservative judges and I am gladdened by those two sources of sunshine in my life (besides the fact that my husband and friends are alive).
I am utterly disheartened by what this blog has turned into. It used to be about conservatives coming together to share ideas. It no longer is. The country is trending democratic and nobody cares. The American people (not aligned to the conservative movement), in general, want a moderate. I don’t think they want a Republican anyway. They want big government, European style, to take care of them.
With such a trend, all I can see happening is the military being pillaged, our taxes across the board going up, even more unchecked immigration, terrorists running amock, universal healthcare for everyone, etc. This is the picture I’m seeing. After losing two friends to 9/11 and a friend in the Iraq War, I’d rather support McCain than the other two. That’s the difference for me in this election.
If anything, run for open state or congressional seats. Support conservative, congressional candidates. Lodge your empty, pointless protest votes. All you will do is compell the country further into the dark, cold night that will befall it when the Dems take over and leave us defenseless and more broke than we already are. Can’t wait for that!
Declaiming that I can’t see past my nose is not an argument, Rose. It is ad hominem attack.
I suffer from no delusions about Christianity or the Republician party being owned…or defined according to my values.
But I am certainly free to observe the values they declaim, and hold them to account against those values. I am free to attempt to persuade them to my convictions.
I am curious; which conservative values are you militating should be “moderated”?
Individual freedom under the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
The freedom to engage in commerce, own property, and contract?
The right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness?
The limits on government under the Constitution?
What?
Oh, brother.
You can drop the sanctimonious facade, Rags. Michelle never implied that your position is superior to anyone elses’ here… she simply reminded CC that she doesn’t like profanity.
Hiding behind Ms. Malkin to prop up your position says a lot more about your character than the profanity says about his character.
Suggest that you grow a set.
Yeah, I’d noted the plethora of “have you stopped beating your wife yet?” type “questions” before. What kind of an idiot would bother to respond to that, lol?
The sheer amount of logical fallacies being tossed out is amazing. Loaded questions, Begging the question, False dilemmas, False choices, etc. – it all only makes up just a steaming plie of non sequiturs that should be rejected out of hand.
Again, you are close…but confused.
Ron Paul is a LIBERTARIAN who goes by the name of “conservative”.
Like McCain, he has chosen to sail under false colors as a matter of expediency.
I have not attacked you, but pointed out some logical inconsistencies in your posts.
For that, I was called a liar by you. That, certainly, is an attack.
I have used historical analogy to make what I consider quite valid points.
In response, you said you hated people who bolster their weak arguments by misapplying history, without any valid argument showing how you could make that sweeping attack.
Rather than continue a dialog that has us…charitably us…upset over misconceptions, I politely ended our exchange, wishing you a good evening.
Respectfully, ma’am, you have a capacity for logical debate that extends only so far, and then breaks down.
Please, let me again wish you a very nice day, and let’s leave it there.
These are rights, not “values”.