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

1. If This is Monday, John McCain’s Energy Policy Has Probably Changed | The Sundries Shack
2. Monday Links : Stop The ACLU
3. Don Surber » Blog Archive » It’s the oil, stupid
4. John McCain = Disaster | The TIW Blog
5. Neocon News » McCain: Our only hope for cheaper gas or is he just full of the stuff?
6. McCain Is All Over The Place On Offshore Drilling « Beltway Snark
7. Does He Mean it? | The Hinge Of Fate
8. Hot Air » Blog Archive » Rasmussen: Plurality of Democrats support … nationalizing America’s oil industry
9. Orange Punch » Blog Archive » Malkin documents McCain’s drilling flip-flops - OCRegister.com
10. Born Again Oil Man: John “spud” McCain–Praise The Lord and Start Drilling « Pronk Palisades
11. Pro Cynic
12. EckerNet.Com » Blog Archive » For Crist’s Sake Why??
13. The Dan Lee Report » Blog Archive » Democrats stall for time on your dime with Offshore Oil Drilling Bill
14. Left Flank: Yet More Political Nonsense about Drilling
15. Michelle Malkin » Obama, Paris, Britney, and Brangelina
16. Michelle Malkin » Rock the House: What should Republicans do now?
17. What did I tell ya? Lindsey Graham signs on to cap-and-tax « In Thru The Out Door

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #352561
   On June 17th, 2008 at 4:51 pm, Bill Grant said:

   Democracy has always been about picking the person who will screw up least

   Hmmm, and we have twisted logic?

   Indeed. It is choice A or choice B. Wrap your head around it.

   I see an Obama presidency as horrible, but easier to deal with. The GOP will grow stronger and be more a resistance to the left leaning policies of an Obama than be a willing accomplice to the left leaning McCain.”

   What you have done here is rationalize losing an election to a socialist. The method that you have chosen to rationalize it is that when Obama screws up the USA it will make the GOP stronger.

   Firstly, rooting for the worst in order to blame the opposition is exactly the sleazy tactic that people like Harry Reid have employed. The USA can not survive or prosper if half the population is rooting for collapse to teach the other half a lesson. Rooting for the worst for the USA is in my opinion traitorous, whether it be Nancy Pelosi or a so called conservative rationalizing rolling over for Obama.

   Secondly, what you haven’t taken in to consideration is that once these entitlement programs are started you can not get rid of them. I invite you to show me one that has been willingly given up. Or that the appeasement that you are endorsing just might cost the USA a city to a freshly emboldened islamist terrorist movement.

   Obamas damage will outlast him, he will mean the end of the USA as a superpower.

2. #352564
   On June 17th, 2008 at 4:58 pm, txvet2 said:

   I invite you to show me one that has been willingly given up.

   Welfare reform, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by Clinton. A Republican Congress, btw, that came about as a direct result of the election of WJB Clinton.

3. #352565
   On June 17th, 2008 at 4:59 pm, Bill Grant said:

   “It doesn’t advance the debate much to call anyone who disagrees with you an Obama or DNC shill, either.”

   These are exactly the kind of tactics and rationalizations that the DNC is employing in order to cleave off the far right from the Republicans. They are pushing for blue on blue friendly fire by exploiting any opening they can get and they are getting their way.

   Arguments that somehow letting Obama have his way with the country to disgust decent people into rebuilding the GOP are just plain idiotic, destructive to the USA and unworkable. I personally have little doubt that they came from a Madison ave. brainstorm session on how to divide the Republicans before the election.

4. #352568
   On June 17th, 2008 at 5:02 pm, franksalterego said:

   Bill Grant, June 17th, 2008 at 4:51 pm

   I see, I’m not alone in my thinking…I’m glad to see, there’s someone who can articulate my ideas better than I do.

5. #352570
   On June 17th, 2008 at 5:04 pm, Bill Grant said:

   “Welfare reform, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by Clinton.”

   So that got rid of welfare? Nope. Still there and going strong.

   So txvet, are you adopting Harry Reids brilliant idea that what is bad for the country is good for your party?

   Some of us actually love our country and don’t want to see others do it harm in order to have the luxury of saying “I told you so”.

6. #352572
   On June 17th, 2008 at 5:05 pm, Bill Grant said:

   Thanks franksalterego-

7. #352587
   On June 17th, 2008 at 5:17 pm, franksalterego said:

   Anyone watching Laura Ingraham’s new show, Just In?

   WOW !!!

8. #352588
   On June 17th, 2008 at 5:20 pm, txvet2 said:

   Some of us actually love our country and don’t want to see others do it harm in order to have the luxury of saying “I told you so”.

   Hard to see how that squares with your support for McCain, given his open borders philosophy, his drinking the global warming Koolaid, and his assault on the First Amendment, among other things. No, I don’t agree with Reid. I just see a better future if we get the socialism out of the Republican Party, not pander to it as McCain is doing. It may take 2-4 years of Obama to get rid of the Democrat Congress and the RINOs who enable them. That’s better than a continuing Democrat Congress passing their socialist agenda and having it signed by a President McCain, who will still be blamed, along with conservatives, for everything that goes wrong.

9. #352589
   On June 17th, 2008 at 5:20 pm, Yashmak said:

   The GOP will grow stronger and be more a resistance to the left leaning policies of an Obama than be a willing accomplice to the left leaning McCain.

   – Donut44

   I think that’s a colossal gamble. With horrible legislation like FAIR being increasingly paraded about in Congress, and all indicators pointing to an increase in the Democrat majority of both the Senate and House this fall, allowing a President like Obama is quite possibly the worst thing we could do. Do you understand that the Democrats will no longer need a 2/3 majority to pass such legislation if Obama is sitting in the Oval Office? Do you realize that the bastion of conservative thought that is talk radio could easily fall victim to such legislation, silencing its voice to 10’s if not 100’s of thousands of voters nationwide?

   If Obama takes office, how will we stop his healthcare program with stronger Democratic majorities in the House and Senate? That program alone will cost close to a trillion dollars in under a decade. . .money that will come out of your pocket and mine. No 2/3 vote required to override a veto there either. It’ll pass. How will a Republican, following Obama, be able to undo THAT? How will Republicans look to the general public after repealing universal healthcare?

   And that’s not even touching on the issue of national security.

   McCain isn’t left leaning. He just doesn’t lean as far right as you (or I) would like.

10. #352591
    On June 17th, 2008 at 5:21 pm, txvet2 said:

    Anyone watching Laura Ingraham’s new show, Just In?

    No, dammit, I wanted to catch Rush on the first segment.

11. #352606
    On June 17th, 2008 at 5:32 pm, txvet2 said:

    McCain isn’t left leaning. He just doesn’t lean as far right as you (or I) would like.

    McCain/Feingold, McCain/Lieberman, McCain/Kennedy, McCain’s Gang of 14, …..looks like a pretty hefty leftward tilt to me. And since he also brags about crossing the aisle (and sitting down), the burden of proof remains on you.

12. #352608
    On June 17th, 2008 at 5:34 pm, franksalterego said:

    So, lemme’ see if I got this straight…

    Just in w/Laura Ingraham on FOX vs. Hardball w/”Tingles” on MSNBC?

    ratings

13. #352619
    On June 17th, 2008 at 5:44 pm, Bill Grant said:

    “Hard to see how that squares with your support for McCain, given his open borders philosophy,”

    He has promised an enforcement first approach. That gives us a fighting chance to exercize some control over how this gets settled which is all you are going to get. The other side realizes this.

    “his drinking the global warming Koolaid,”

    Unfortunate but look at the alternative. McCain has pledged not to get us mixed up in a Kyoto like treaty, the opposition has pledged to sign it.

    “and his assault on the First Amendment,”

    Bull.

    “No, I don’t agree with Reid.”

    You are advocating the same tactic of trashing the country in order to “save it.” Not only will it not work out the way you want it to but at the moment, with 2 wars, a committed enemy and a national debt that is 3/4ths of our GDP we simply can not afford to indulge in this. This country is at a critical juncture and it is vital that we chose the correct path.

    No one said that simply flipping the lever was going to be the end of everybody’s commitment to what we believe in. It is going to take work after the fact. McCain will give us a fighting chance, electing Obama will probably mean the end of the USA as we know it.

    “It may take 2-4 years of Obama to get rid of the Democrat Congress and the RINOs who enable them.”

    You are indulging in pure fantasy. Republicans are going to LOSE seats in the congress during this election cycle. Regardless, think of what this guy can do with control of the executive and legislative branches of government. (And the judicial by the time he is finished.) You are talking about ridding the government of “socialism” by electing socialists and enabling them to enact entitlement programs that you are going to need dynamite to get rid of. What kind of sense does that make?

    “That’s better than a continuing Democrat Congress passing their socialist agenda and having it signed by a President McCain, who will still be blamed, along with conservatives, for everything that goes wrong.”

    He has vowed to veto their entitlement programs and their pork barrel spending and his record as a spending hawk proves that he is serious… and Newsflash: They are going to blame the GOP and the media will be backing them up regardless. Is that any reason to give them complete, unobstructed control of the government? That is EXACTALY what you propose.

    Your proposition is Orwellian new-speak: Get rid of socialism by electing a socialist government. It will not work. It is poison for the country.

14. #352632
    On June 17th, 2008 at 5:55 pm, txvet2 said:

    Your proposition is Orwellian new-speak: Get rid of socialism by electing a socialist government. It will not work.

    Worked OK in 1994.

15. #352634
    On June 17th, 2008 at 5:57 pm, txvet2 said:

    Look, you have a bunch of promises from McCain, extracted reluctantly during a political campaign. I have his legislative record. You can argue until you’re blue in the face or your fingers go numb. You’re entitled to vote for McCain, and I’m entitled to not vote for him. End of story, end of conversation.

16. #352642
    On June 17th, 2008 at 6:04 pm, Donut44 said:

    Yashmak,

    It is a huge gamble, no doubt, but unfortunately one I, and many other conservatives (I hoped all) must take. Unfortunately, McCain is much more left leaning than you are giving him credit for and as I stated before, I think it is less of a gamble to predict that he will continue that way if voted into office.

    I also still have a lot of faith in the American people, that when faced with issues without a party standing out in front to dictate to them where they should stand, they side with liberty more times than not. I think immigrations, taxes, imminent domain and many other issues prove this. We must rely on the house, even when it is democrat, to save us because the voice of the people does matter.

    However, with McCain in office, the wolf in sheep’s clothing will destroy the credibility of the conservative movement and will very likely pass all of those same things you talk about.

    And you do bring up a most important thing, which is Congress. I may not be voting McCain, but I will be in full force to vote for my republican congressman who have done what needs to be done. The media always says the GOP is going to lose seats, but this time, they may be right.

17. #352658
    On June 17th, 2008 at 6:21 pm, Bill Grant said:

    “Worked OK in 1994.”

    So…losing elections = More control of government…. Nope..

    No it didn’t. It is incredibly self-sabotaging. The end result, working for the worst to blame the opposition will drag my country down in to the dirt. I thought “our” side was better then that. If this is a race to the bottom you will lose because they do not even make any pretense about loving the United States.

    Where are you getting this? Where is this being broadcast? Who is putting this out. I guarantee it originates at the DNC. Seriously, where did you first hear this nonsense?

    “I have his legislative record. “

    Which is congruent with what he is promising. YOUR candidate, Obama doesn’t have a legislative record.

    “You’re entitled to vote for McCain, and I’m entitled to not vote for him. End of story, end of conversation.”

    Jamb your fingers in your ears if you wish.

    You are entitled to bury your head in the sand and rationalize your support for everything that you pretend to oppose and I am entitled to point out that wishing for the government to make disastrous decisions which will hurt Americans is inherently seditious. I am entitled to point out that voting for or by your inaction allowing socialists to take office because you oppose socialism is inherently stupid. I am entitled to point out that you have probably been spun by a someone in the opposition who has fed you a clever argument that appeals to the lowest common denominator because they want you to help them elect Obama.

18. #352668
    On June 17th, 2008 at 6:35 pm, Bill Grant said:

    “It is a huge gamble, no doubt, but unfortunately one I, and many other conservatives (I hoped all) must take.”

    Losing an election to a socialist in order to get more conservatism… It’s crazy…

    “I also still have a lot of faith in the American people, that when faced with issues without a party standing out in front to dictate to them where they should stand, they side with liberty more times than not.”

    Obviously not, what you are hoping for is that they elect someone who will be a disaster for the country in order to teach them a lesson… Doesn’t sound like you have a lot of faith in Americans at all.

    “We must rely on the house, even when it is democrat, to save us because the voice of the people does matter.”

    They are going to have all branches of government. Elections are “the voice of the people”. They will see their victory as an endorsement of the policies they want to peruse and they will be absolutely correct in doing so.

    “However, with McCain in office, the wolf in sheep’s clothing will destroy the credibility of the conservative movement and will very likely pass all of those same things you talk about.”

    What you are advocating, electing socialists and giving them free reign in government doesn’t do a whole lot for the “credibility” of the conservative movement.

    “I may not be voting McCain, but I will be in full force to vote for my republican congressman who have done what needs to be done.”

    Great, by your reasoning you will be electing the last of the scapegoats. Here’s an idea! Why not elect the best government we can and then get active in promoting conservative causes through political action committees and god old fashion hard work?

    Have conservatives become afraid of work? The opposition isn’t and that is why they are winning. They sure as hell aren’t talking about deliberately losing elections either.

19. #352684
    On June 17th, 2008 at 6:47 pm, Donut44 said:

    Bill,

    You can go through my post word for word and add your little sarcasm and no substance and that is your right. Throwing the word socialism around and pretending to read people’s minds doesn’t really count for anything now does it.

    Why don’t you go through my other posts while you are at it and you can know my complete stand, or would that be too much hard work? The only lazy people are those who will vote for McCain because he is the best of the worst. Why don’t you spend the next 6 months coming up with a better candidate?

    As for electing a socialist, you are much closer to doing it than I am. I am not voting for Obama or McCain. Can’t say it enough and none of you can refute it, voters don’t lose elections for candidates, the candidate himself does. If McCain wanted our vote, he should have gone after it.

    My optimism in the American people remains steadfast for the reason I stated, which ironically is not one of the parts you quoted. Outside of the political mumbo jumbo, we voice our concerns over issues. It is right now that everyone sinks into their respective parties and sells out principles like yourself.

20. #352707
    On June 17th, 2008 at 7:18 pm, Irish Rose said:

    BTW, there are some here who accuse me of having an anti-religious bias. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    I’ve been a Christian all of my adult life. I also understand that there is a huge difference between biblical Christianity and Christian fundamentalism, and I have very little patience for right-wing elitist arrogance.

    I respect John McCain for his refusal pander to rabid, arm-twisting fundamentalists and his willingness to step up to the plate and call a spade a spade.

    In fact, I applaud him for it.

    I’m quite certain that his public disdain for arm-twisting fundamentalists will extend to the Arab world once he takes office.

    Just one more reason to vote McCain in my book.

21. #352725
    On June 17th, 2008 at 7:33 pm, Bill Grant said:

    “Why don’t you go through my other posts while you are at it and you can know my complete stand, or would that be too much hard work?“

    Here:

    “The GOP will grow stronger and be more a resistance to the left leaning policies of an Obama than be a willing accomplice to the left leaning McCain.”

    Where are you getting this foolish idea that in order to have more influence you ought to roll over and let the people who stand for what is diametrically opposite off what you supposedly advocate have complete control over the government? Losing elections does not make a party stronger. Shooting yourself in the kneecap does not make you a better runner. Who was the first one to put this idea in your head? I think it would be interesting to track the source of this. I am picturing some conference table with Howard Dean nodding at the end with a big grin on his face.

    “The only lazy people are those who will vote for McCain because he is the best of the worst.

    ”

    So effectively endorsing someone because you will believe he will be so lousy that the GOP base will have no choice but to get off it’s rear and do what you think they ought to do is the obvious solution to the little dilemma. What has happened is that you have embraced the politics of the hissy fit. If it isn’t exactly your way then bring on the ruination of the country. Not a good plan.

    “Why don’t you spend the next 6 months coming up with a better candidate?”

    That’s what the primaries were for. Remember? Everyone voted? That whole thing? McCain got elected to be nominee? The truth is someone who is far right couldn’t be elected in the current environment. Your solution? Elect someone who is far, far left… Not particularly “conservative”…

    “As for electing a socialist, you are much closer to doing it than I am. I am not voting for Obama or McCain.”

    Please. You can not compare the 2. Obama is the most liberal senator in the senate. He wants to surrender to the islamist vermin who have attacked us, he wants to create gigantic socialist entitlement programs that YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET RID OF. What he proposes will change the USA for the worse.

    “Can’t say it enough and none of you can refute it, voters don’t lose elections for candidates, the candidate himself does”

    The people get the government they deserve, I have no doubt that you deserve to live under Obama, the problem is the rest of us don’t. And no, the media has a huge say in who wins or loses. They too want Obama.

    “If McCain wanted our vote, he should have gone after it.”

    He has. I don’t know what it will take to satisfy some of you. Seeing the old man jump through a flaming hoop?

    “My optimism in the American people remains steadfast for the reason I stated, which ironically is not one of the parts you quoted.”

    The very idea that you advocate allowing someone to make a mess out of the country to teach the GOP a lesson shows that you have nothing but contempt for the American people and the country at large.

    “It is right now that everyone sinks into their respective parties and sells out principles like yourself.”

    My principals are freedom, individualism, the Constitution and the preservation of the United States and it’s status in the world. These are principles which by your actions (or inaction) are helping Obama to subvert. Kind of funny that you would lecture others on principles.

    John McCain is a good man who loves the USA and he is running against someone who resents the hell out of the country. I can continue to fight for my principals and will do so with a McCain presidency. Indeed, many of his principals are mine as well. Barack Obama isn’t going to leave a whole lot left to fight for.

22. #353123
    On June 18th, 2008 at 11:14 am, flenser said:

    witless man

    #1 I don’t like obscene profits.

    #2 I’d be glad to look at it.

    #3 That’s not what bothers me.

    #4 We should look at incentives being given to corporations.

    …. and now let’s connect the dots.

    The so called “obscene profits” don’t bother me. I’d rather look into giveaway incentives to corporations.

    Even for you, this is a bit much. Anyone with the reading comprehension of an eight years old can see that the words “That’s not what bothers me” are refering to the idea of windfall profit taxes. Not, as you seem to think, to “obscene profits”.

23. #353135
    On June 18th, 2008 at 11:19 am, flenser said:

    Bill Grant

    My principals are freedom, individualism, the Constitution and the preservation of the United States and it’s status in the world.

    ..

    I can continue to fight for my principals and will do so with a McCain presidency. Indeed, many of his principals are mine as well.

    McCain’s principles are not “freedom, individualism, the Constitution and the preservation of the United States and it’s status in the world”. His career in Congress has been an assault on all of these things. For instance, McCain-Finegold was an assault on freedom and the Constitution. And McCain-Kennedy was an assault on the United States.

    Where are you getting this foolish idea that in order to have more influence you ought to roll over and let the people who stand for what is diametrically opposite off what you supposedly advocate have complete control over the government?

    McCain is diametrically opposite to me.

24. #353181
    On June 18th, 2008 at 11:40 am, Donut44 said:

    Nice Bill and very persuasive!

25. #353205
    On June 18th, 2008 at 11:55 am, Donut44 said:

    Flenser, it is hopeless with so many of these McCain supporters. There are some on here, that state their position very well and some have even almost convinced me to hold my nose and jump. But I always brought back around by some of these people who I have bit my tongue and erased many a word I wanted to call them, but I realize that will accomplish nothing.

    Their principles are gone and party is all that matters to them. Their hatred towards us and the fact mentioned before all point to a political style that is not conservative, but reminiscent of how party politics is played, much like a union. Force everything through and down people’s throats. I have no doubt many of these same people would have no problem threatening me and my family to get what they need and want, all in the name of doing what is right in their mind.

    All I want is to live my life with the liberty every man deserves and is entitled to have. Obama certainly won’t do it, but either will McCain. I don’t know how this idea of the “lesser of two evils” came into existence as somehow noble and better than standing firm. I guess man can talk himself into anything.

    We have six months before election time and McCain can do some things. Go hop in his Senator chair and push through making the tax cuts permanant and setting up legislation for energy independence (offshore drilling, nuclear power, lifting refinery regulatory “junk”) and pushing this through NOW or putting that in a first 100 days pledge if elected. I will give my word that if he does this, I WILL vote for him and do so gladly.

    To all our comrades in the McCain camp, if you want conservatives to vote for your man McCain, quit belittling those that aren’t voting for him and go make a difference. Calling us names and saying we are for Obama, pretending WE are the socialists, and spreading your new definition of democracy around isn’t doing it.

26. #353230
    On June 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pm, DBNinKY said:

    If things are this bad now without drilling in ANWR, with gas at nearly five dollars a gallon and grocery and utility rates climbing, imagine how bad it will be without drilling in ANWR ten years from now.

    It is time to open ANWR for drilling.

27. #353286
    On June 18th, 2008 at 1:00 pm, Dimsdale said:

    On June 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pm, DBNinKY said:

    If things are this bad now without drilling in ANWR, with gas at nearly five dollars a gallon and grocery and utility rates climbing, imagine how bad it will be without drilling in ANWR ten years from now.

    It is time to open ANWR for drilling.

    Bingo! Over 10 years ago, the libs fought the ANWR drilling by saying “it would take 10 years before we get a drop of oil.” Well, we’d have that oil on tap today if it weren’t for them.

    Now they are saying the same thing. But by their own words, won’t the oil situation be far worse in another decade?

28. #353506
    On June 18th, 2008 at 3:24 pm, longbow said:

    Donut44 has it right.

    McCain if I recall correctly is a Senator right now, and can introduce all sorts of bills if he wants to – so why doesn’t he? He could introduce a bill to allow drilling wherever we damn well need to drill.

    If he has answers why does he have to wait until after he’s elected to propose them? Doesn’t he have the best interests of our Country at heart, or am I mistaken, he has only self-interest?

29. #353678
    On June 18th, 2008 at 5:55 pm, Bill Grant said:

    “McCain’s principles are not “freedom, individualism, the Constitution and the preservation of the United States and it’s status in the world”. His career in Congress has been an assault on all of these things”

    It amazes me how you can state that. He has had 50 years of dedicated service to the USA and it has been in the service of the principals I have outlined. Do I agree with everything he has advocated? No. He is however our best hope for having influence on the government and his shift on domestic drilling and the immigration bill shows that he DOES listen. If Obama is elected he will plow right over your objections.

    “For instance, McCain-Finegold was an assault on freedom and the Constitution”

    I disagree with McCain/Finegold but it was not an “assault on freedom and the Constitution”. Show me who this has censored or damaged, indeed, show me what effect this has had at all. The 501c corporations have stepped right in to the void.

    “And McCain-Kennedy was an assault on the United States.”

    And it was resoundingly defeated, in part by the work of good people here. Your obligation to the country does not end with flipping the lever in the voting booth. Any candidate that gets elected will need to be reminded of the will of the people from time to time. McCain has vowed to peruse an enforcement first policy after the last disaster. Obama will roll right on thorough with Amnesty Plus. How do I know that Obama will do that? It is one of the things he is running on.

    “McCain is diametrically opposite to me.”

    Is that you Markos Moulitsas? Look, if you are an Obama supporter then that is your right. Just don’t kid yourself that you are behaving out of conservative principles, because you are not.

30. #353693
    On June 18th, 2008 at 6:09 pm, Bill Grant said:

    Nice Bill and very persuasive!

    Thank you, If I come across as snarky or rude I apologize. I am just passionate about the fact that Obama would be a catastrophe for this country. I believe McCain to be a good man and no one can question his dedication to the country itself. I know and come from some of the same traditions this man was raised with and the idea that he would betray the country out of cynicism or expedience is just plain wrong. John McCain has demonstrated that he loves the USA. Obama has demonstrated that he thinks it is populated by a bunch of bitter, constitution clinging, hillbilly bigots who haven’t been indoctrinated educated into compliance with their agenda enlightenment.

31. #353711
    On June 18th, 2008 at 6:29 pm, Bill Grant said:

    “All I want is to live my life with the liberty every man deserves and is entitled to have. Obama certainly won’t do it, but either will McCain. I don’t know how this idea of the “lesser of two evils” came into existence as somehow noble and better than standing firm. I guess man can talk himself into anything.”

    At the end of it we are all responsible for our own liberty. McCain will help to preserve it.(even reclaim some that has been lost) Obama will make you out to be a ignorant redneck for insisting on it.

    I have been trying to trace the idea that allowing Obama to win would somehow purify the GOP back to it’s source. A friend runs a PR agency and he suspects that it came out of Hill & Knowlton or Jasculca-Terman. If you or anyone else recall where you first heard it please let me know.

    “To all our comrades in the McCain camp, if you want conservatives to vote for your man McCain, quit belittling those that aren’t voting for him and go make a difference.”

    Very good advice. Please believe that I see a very real threat to our way of life, our country, our sovereignty and Constitution in Obama and what he advocates. Perhaps when some of us state that it sounds like hyperbole but I happen to think that is just clear vision.

32. #353728
    On June 18th, 2008 at 6:52 pm, Yashmak said:

    I also still have a lot of faith in the American people, that when faced with issues without a party standing out in front to dictate to them where they should stand, they side with liberty more times than not.

    – Donut44

    Hmm. I think that, given just the evidence provided by how many are willing to follow Obama’s path, that your faith in the wisdom of the average American voter is a bit naiive (I don’t intend that as a statement that you are naiive in general). You speak of a situation where there isn’t a party out in front of the voters telling them which way to think, but that isn’t the case. Regardless of which candidate wins the Presidency, BOTH parties will still be there, telling us which way to think.

    Right now, the nation seems to be slightly leaning towards a marked lack of a long view, where it comes to their personal liberties and small government. . .preferring instead entitlements and handouts.

    I can’t see the future though. Perhaps I’m overly cynical.

33. #354482
    On June 19th, 2008 at 2:41 pm, martin.musculus said:

    #319
    On June 18th, 2008 at 5:55 pm, Bill Grant said:

    RE:
    McCain/Fiengold:
    wrong test. What part of “Congress shall make no” do you mistake?

    And, just to move things along:
    the Founding Fathers were refering to political speech. The “yelling fire in a crowded theater” was a canard. It wasn’t applicable, unless somehow yelling “fire” in a crowded theater had some political tint.

    As I explained to my grandson, the “Congress shall make no…” is why there can’t be “truth-in-advertising” laws applied to political commercial.

    Next!

    – martin.musculus

34. #359683
    On June 25th, 2008 at 12:46 pm, Bill Grant said:

    “What part of “Congress shall make no” do you mistake?”

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    So how does the McCain-Feingold Act intrude on first amendment rights?

    Specifically.

    Why hasn’t it been overturned in the courts if it is unconstitutional?