Hey, how’s all that Hispandering working out for McCain?
McCain was quick to remind conservatives that former Mexican government employee and open-borders advocate Juan Hernandez wasn’t his employee, but rather an unpaid campaign volunteer.
Well, it looks like the McCain campaign is really getting their money’s worth from him:
Democrat Barack Obama has opened a big lead among Hispanic voters, winning support from the vast majority of those who had voted for rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries, according to a poll released Thursday.
____________
{Post by See-Dubya}
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
- McCain’s Hispandering Gambit Looks Like a Failure | The Sundries Shack
- McCain’s sellout to illegal aliens hasn’t paid off | The TIW Blog
- The Rude News » Blog Archive » Dirty Sanchez Hernandez Strikes Out
- After five… « Transbay Tunnel
- Still Believe John McCain’s Going to Put Border Security First, You Gullible Republicans? | The Sundries Shack
- Michelle Malkin » Conservatives played it coy
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: John McCain, Open Borders Lobby
Right Pundits
» Joe Lieberman: Fort Hood Shooter Is ‘Home-Grown Terrorist’Legal Insurrection
» Bruni de la Motte for Health Care CzarRiehl World View
» Obama: No Military Death Shall Go UnexploitedLegal Insurrection
» In The End: No Public Option, No Abortions, No Pelosi, No ReidThe Other McCain
» Paralysis by analysisThe Powers That Be
» Obama: ‘Don’t Jump to Conclusions’ About Ft. Hood; Immediately Jumps to ConclusionsLegal Insurrection
» NY Times Names Names
On July 27th, 2008 at 11:23 am, JHSII said:
Boy I regret teaching you that word.
On July 27th, 2008 at 2:39 pm, JHSII said:
So do you just sit here and hit “refresh” all day? Aren’t “conservatives” supposed to have jobs?
In essence.
I did, obviously.
Bill wipe the froth off your chin, you’re losing it.
Oh sure…get ahead while I’m typing why dontcha.
On July 27th, 2008 at 2:48 pm, nyc123me said:
Sarcasm: I was ATTACKED!, Boo hoo…/sarcasm.
No froth on my chin, thank you. You do have on your nose though.
Are you in NYC?
It’s Sunday, genius.
Oh…and it does appear that it is you, Bill, that is doing a healthy bit of “refreshing”.
Further, Bill Grant lied, attacked, and trolled when he posted:
I don’t feel that people attack me when they disagree with me – only when they attack me. Heck, people disagree with me from time to time, and I never have a problem with it.
Another attack, just like we have come to expect from Bill Grant. And yes, it was an attack, and it was directed at me. If it wasn’t addressed to me, then it would have not been a direct response to my post and wouldn’t have quoted me in the response.
As none of this describes anything of what I have been doing or posting, it must be that Bill is projecting. One has to ask if Bill really believes this tripe, or if he’s just a standard-issue troll?
No you haven’t, not even once. In fact, here you even snipped off the most important part of the question so that not only you didn’t try to answer it again, but you went off on another attack cycle.
The question again:
How is attacking Conservatives like me supposed to make us want to vote for or support McCain?
There’s an easy 2-word answer.
The only things that are verifiable are that I am a Conservative. I value individualism. I think for myself. If Bill would stop pulling a Joseph Welch on me, he would know that.
No, my standard procedure has been to repeat a question that you should easily be able to answer and then hear you repeatedly refuse to answer it while you shout that you did answer it. Repetaedly screaming that you did answer the question – when you haven’t answered it at all – isn’t an answer.
Again, saying that you’ve answered the question twice in this thread alone – when you still haven’t answered it even once – isn’t an answer.
I’m not the one who’s looking infantile here, Bill. But, in the great tradition of Joseph Welch, you wouldn’t know that, would you?
This isn’t our first time around.
I see Bill Grant has a hate-on against me again.
in the response to me in Post#197
You never taught me anything, Bill – except that you are a liar and a troll.
from Post #198
The standard attacks from Bill. His credibility rating still has to climb to zero.
Not in fact nor in essence. Why don’t you try responding to what I post in fact?
No you haven’t, not even once. Oh, you’ve said that you responded, but that isn’t a response to the question. And changing the question and responding to the changed version isn’t a response to the actual question either.
Here’s the question – again – (and let’s watch as Bill once again avoids answering the question while screaming that he’s already answered it):
How is attacking Conservatives like me supposed to make us want to vote for or support McCain?
How about a real answer, Bill? Just once?
lol
You guys are unfair to Bill Grant. I find his comments measured, rational, and realistic.
However, some of your comments have been absolutely puerile.
I read someone’s comment (perhaps on another thread) which states that McCain is a social liberal because he favors illegals. That’s absurd.
John McCain has a very strong pro life voting record. If that isn’t an indication of social conservatism then nothing is.
Listen, I am not a McCain supporter. I did not vote for him in the primaries. My guy lost. However, the primaries are over. We have a choice between dumb and dumber. I’m going to vote for dumb. Those of you who refuse to vote, or will vote for a 3rd party, are not living in reality. There is no other option.
I am going to repeat myself because many of you don’t seem to want to listen or read well. I am not a McCain supporter. He has infuriated me many times with his “reaching across the aisle” and compromising with the Dems. And again, I am going to end up holding my nose and voting for him because Obama is that much worse than he is, believe it or not.
Another point: Illegal immigration, and immigration, are not the only issues facing America. We are at war. We are facing an enemy that wants to destroy our civilization and openly states that fact. At least McCain is not oblivious to it, but Obama is. He has openly stated that he will side with Muslims if the “winds turn ugly”. You know what that means. Obama will coddle and protect Muslims who want to overthrow our government. Frankly, I find Muslims more of a threat to America than I do Hispanics.
Secondly, some of you are being absolutely disingenuous when you criticize McCain’s statement about Americans of Hispanic descent who have contributed to our country. He is right. Many Americans of Hispanic descent have bravely fought and died in our wars: WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Iraq… To deny that fact makes you appear either dishonest or unhinged.
Don’t let your anger over the illegal issue turn you into a bigot or lose sight of the truth of the matter. It only serves to discredit the cause.
I am against illegal immigration. My mother was a legal immigrant who became a very patriotic American. We are all descendents of immigrants. Do not interchange the words and distort the truth in your attempt to fight the illegal problems we face.
Lastly, it’s very apparent to me that Obama will not look out for American’s best interests in any issue that arises. His tour of Europe has demonstrated that. His naivete, his poor judgment, his lack of experience, his inability to deal with reality, his marxist ideals, and his history are evidence in support of his lack of patriotism. McCain does not suffer in those respects – at least not to the degree that Obama does.
It’s down to a choice between those two. No one else has a shot in the White House. That’s the sorry truth of the matter.
atheling said #208:
Have you read any of his attacks on me (and others) in this thread?
Please indicate which of those attacks you find to be measured, rational, or realistic:
On the other hand, atheling, you did provide me with the biggest laugh of the day!!
On July 27th, 2008 at 3:09 pm, JHSII whined:
Oh, so when I wasn’t conversing with you that was somehow an “attack.”
Look, I think you are an idiot. I think that because every time you latch on to something I have written like this and incessantly whine for pages and pages that is what you are stating to me. (That and that you are kind of creepy.) I am comfortable ignoring you yet it seems that you want to periodically whine and complain that you are being attacked and consume tons of bandwidth playing the victim. I am not sure what that does for you but I find it boring as hell.
I Really regret teaching you the word “projecting”. Indeed, it does describe your posts perfectly.
OK we have this:
And this:
If I have been going through your posts line by line how could you suggest that I haven’t been answering your question?
The question is loaded and asserts a false premise. You aren’t a “conservative”. You are a big crybaby. See?
Once again, you are not a consirvative. Anyone who would allow for an Obama presidency isn’t inherently conservative. Or even a particularly patriotic American.Indeed, parrots are not particularly consirvative creatures. I have repeatedly answered that question. If you don’t want to get “attacked” try not repeating the same thing over and over again.
Your past history with me would indicate otherwise.
Tilt that head up and you will see that it has been answered.
Grow up, will you?
I guess we can add “Joseph Welch” to “projecting” to the non sequitur words and phrases you toss out to make non points. Great.
We done?
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/26/hey-hows-all-that-hispandering-working-out-for-mccain/#comment-387893
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/26/hey-hows-all-that-hispandering-working-out-for-mccain/#comment-387498
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/26/hey-hows-all-that-hispandering-working-out-for-mccain/#comment-387716
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/26/hey-hows-all-that-hispandering-working-out-for-mccain/#comment-387721
Have you actually read them? They make sense.
Thanks atheling.
atheling,
Ditto.
On July 27th, 2008 at 3:19 pm, JHSII said:
You are a creepy stalker. That’s all.
Get over it.
I ran out of synonyms for idiot.
Gee, this isn’t pathetic or anything at this point. You are not going to get the answer you want to hear because the premise that you are asserting is wrong.
Fixed it for you.
Done and done.
JHSII:
I don’t know what you mean about the biggest laugh. It’s apparent that you don’t take anyone else seriously but yourself.
I can see that it’s impossible to discuss this with you – it has made you irrational and unhinged.
Good luck.
Bill Grant lied, trolled and attacked in post #211:
If you actually bothered to read what I posted, Bill, I didn’t whine.
It would be helpful, Bill, if you wouldn’t snip out the relevant parts before responding.
And here you prove me right about you again – you are a troll.
As you never taught me the word projecting, we have yet another outright lie from you.
Again, no whining from me. And as for the premise of the question, there’s nothing false about it, except maybe your lack of actual answers.
I noticed how you cut the question again so that you could avoid answering it again.
I’m not suggesting anything – I’m outright saying it – because you haven’t answered the question.
Again, saying that you answered the question – when you have never answered the question – isn’t an answer to the question.
Here you’re proving me right – again. (and I do get tired of using the word again with you, but you keep proving me right again and again…yawn)
The question is based on your attacks on me and Conservatives like me, and your wanting Conservatives to vote for and support McCain. Therefore, the question is accurate and precise.
Once again, you are a liar. I am a Conservative.
I never said that I would allow for an Obama presidency. You certainly didn’t get that from any of my posts.
You have never answered the question.
Actually, my past history with you demonstrates that I value individualism and that I think for myself. It also demonstrates that I don’t suffer bullies and trolls gladly.
Another lie by Bill.Remember – telling me that the question has been answered is not an answer to the question.
I’m not the one who is trolling this thread.
An accurate description of your posts is not a non sequitur. And you don’t even know who Joseph Welch is, do you?
As far as my points go, they are concise and accurate. The fact that you can’t refute anything isn’t my problem.
I don’t know. Are you done trolling, lying, and attacking?
Oh, yes, here’s the question Bill keeps not answering:
How is attacking Conservatives like me supposed to make us want to vote for or support McCain?
atheling #215 posted:
I’m not the one who has become irrational and unhinged – maybe you are confusing me with Bill.
If you want to discuss something, then go ahead. I’m happy to discuss it with you.
And if you don’t know where I got the laugh from, then you’re the one with the problem. Perhaps you could answer the question Bill keeps refusing to answer.
Thanks, that was great! I’ll probably forget to, but next time somebody tells me they’re a hyphenated-American I think I’ll respond by telling them that I’m totally American.
Bill Grant #214 trolled in:
You’re a liar and a troll.
I’m not the one with the problem.
More proof that you’re a troll.
Again, I’m not the one with the problem.
So you changed a quote again to get in yet another attack. You know, it would have taken far less effort just to answer the question.
It still hasn’t happened. Again – saying that you have answered the question – when you have never answered the question – isn’t a real answer to the question, no matter how many times you repeat it.
You are even now.
Seeing what you want to see is also a leftist attribute.
Show me where you used it here before I accused you of psychological projection. Better yet, get a life.
Obviously you haven’t gotten tired of this, it’s the most attention you have had in years. To a normal person though, this would have gotten old.
You are not a conservative, you are a moron.
Actually yes, yes you are. Indeed, you waddled in to it and beclowned yourself. Well done. Now you are going to continue on until rapture in an infantile quest to get the last word, as if that signified an inelegant argument.
LOL.
You are not a conservative, you are a moron, so the question is based on an incorrect premise.
See, answered. Again. Won’t stop you from re asking though, will it?
Keep telling yourself that. That’s right, retreat back to your “happy place”.
LOL, dance puppet! dance!
JHSII:
Sorry, but you have little credibility. I have listed those comments by Bill Grant which I consider rational, as you requested. Don’t you have any comment regarding those? No, instead you ignore them.
So far, I see that it is you who is being the irrational one. You refuse to address those points that I and many others have made regarding the differences between McCain and Obama. That is either dishonest, or just wilfull blindness.
You also fail to respond to my point about the fact that illegal immigration is not the only important issue facing America today.
Indeed, your comments and stance reflect a real myopia regarding politics and the issues. I am uncertain that you are a conservative. A conservative is not just focused on one issue: illegals. The fact that you only focus on that particular issue gives me cause to think that you are simply a bigot who masquerades as a conservative.
I am willing to hear your stance on other issues besides illegals, like abortion, for instance. Or the war in Iraq. Or energy independence. Or American sovereignty vs. the UN.
Can you enlighten us on your positions therein?
You complain about being “attacked”. You hardly have a leg to stand on when you respond rudely and immaturely yourself.
I really don’t know what was the “laugh” you refer to. But then, insane people laugh for no apparent reason all the time. If you want to appear sane, then please respond as such.
Bill Grant trolled in, lied, and attacked:
Another lie by Bill. SOP.
I see what’s actually there.
So, my entire existance started only when I first posted here on this blog. I’ve never used any words or terms or descriptions before I came here and saw you posting. /sarc off
Why don’t you stop lying? Why don’t you stop trolling?
Why don’t you post the full statement in context and respond to that?
You’re a liar and a troll. It’s nice of you to keep proving it.
More proof that you’re a liar and a troll.
I guess not. You do an excellent job of mimicking him, though.
You are a liar and a troll. That’s why you never will answer the question.
Oh, the question is based on your premise, Bill.
More proof that Bill is a troll.
The more Bill posts, the more he proves me right.
atheling #223
I have “complained” – if you want to use that word – about being attacked only when I have been attacked. I’ve actually been rather nice to Bill, given all of his attacks against me. It might be helpful for you to see the history of Bill’s attacks, but somehow I get the feeling that you would only see what you want to see.
As far as my laughing goes, it’s based on you apparently missing all of Bill’s over-the-top nonsense. I’m not the one whose sanity you should be questioning.
atheling #222:
It isn’t my credibility that you should be questioning. In fact, I agree with that you that we are left with no choice but to vote McCain.
Here, I will point out the difference between “vote for” and “support”.
I will vote for McCain because the alternative is worse.
I will not support McCain because I see no reason to believe that he believes in any Conservative ideas.
See the difference?
The questions become: Does McCain want my vote? Does McCain want my support?
Will McCain get my vote? Probably.
Will McCain get my support? I don’t know. When will he show me that he wants my support?
Actually, I have addressed those points – just not in this thread. And I’m not going out of my way to attack people who are still on the fence either.
Just out of curiosity, do I have to respond to each and every point I agree with?
Huh? I’ve never focused on the one singular issue of immigration. Now, in a thread about immigration, why would I not focus on the issue of immigration?
I have in other threads.
If you want it here too, ok.
I’m against abortion generally. In certain cases I can see a reason, but “I don’t want a baby” damned well isn’t it.
The War in Iraq: It’s not a war, it’s just one front in a much larger war against militant Islam. I am pro-Surge and want Iraq used as a staging area just like we used France prior to going into Germany in WWII. I notice we didn’t stop at the French-German border and wait for Germany to rebuild before moving in.
Energy Independence: Drill here, drill now. We would already be independent if the liberals had gotten out of the way.
The UN: Why are we still in the UN? How about a “United Democracies”?
That good enough for you?
So far, I see you calling Bill Grant a “troll”. You are wrong. lgm is a troll. scooter is a troll. sausage is a troll.
When you apply an inappropriate term to someone, it indicates that you do not have a clear understanding of that term. It also distorts the true meaning of the word.
Secondly, again, I have listed comments made by Bill Grant which I found reasonable and realistic, which you requested. I have asked you to comment on those, a request which you ignored.
It seems that you are the one who is being dishonest and irrational in this debate. You refuse to respond to my requests, while I have complied with yours. I have provided evidence, you have not. Who is being “blind” here?
Okay, I see you have indeed responded to my questions. Please disregard the above comment. I will address yours momentarily.
Maybe atheling, you should read post #226 before you go off on me.
I’ll wait to respond to your #227 until after you read my post #226.
atheling #228
Ok, thanks. Too bad posting on a blog has a time lag…let’s not even talk about my bad typing…
If you’re talking about blowing up a building, I agree….however, illegal immigration, not just Hispanics but all illegal immigration, is IMO more likely to destroy America than the Muslim threat. Might not happen quickly, like a terrorist attack, but over time the nation is being occupied by people who, mostly, have no desire to be Americans. Some of the Dems have said to illegals, Lindsey Graham for one, that there “is no America”, that it is only an “idea”. Well, the ideas of those who come here illegally and do not want to assimilate aren’t likely to improve America for those who came here legally……..to put it mildly.
Well, goodness, why didn’t you say so? I believe the same thing. I will vote for McCain, but not support him, in the sense that I won’t do any campaigning for him or give him money. I think that wiseman and Bill Grant are also on the same page. Both, as I, state that they are voting for McCain because there is no other choice. But why do you berate them for that if you think the same way?
It would help, in order to clarify things.
I agree as well, though I am probably more vehemently opposed to abortion for any reason than that the life of the mother is at risk, which then I think is up to the parents to decide.
Well, McCain has the same stance as you and I, as opposed to Obama.
I am in perfect agreement with you on that issue as well. I am sure you know that when it comes to this issue, we have a better chance with McCain and the Republicans listening to us than the Democrats and Obama, wouldn’t you think?
Perfect agreement as well, though I distrust so many of our “democratic allies” these days that I don’t even want to associate with them anymore. Again, I think McCain will look out for our interests there better than Obama will, as his “Blame America First” speech in Berlin proves.
Well, we agree on many issues, and I can see that you are a conservative. So why the fighting with Bill Grant and wiseman? Sigh.
Truly, we have got to stop this infighting and unite against our real enemies: Islam, the UN, the EU, and the useful idiots in our country who support them: Libtards.
Thanks, JHSII, for taking the time to clarify all this.
Bob, I fear creeping Sharia more than any bombs blowing up in our cities. We can maintain vigilance against the former quite well, but against the latter we have proven to be utterly weak. That’s my main worry.
Secondly, Sharia Law is completely incompatible with western democracy. It is a totalitarian ideology.
Hispanics do not promote that sort of system. Indeed, most Hispanics are Christian, which is compatible, if not one of the foundations of western style democracy.
That’s why I fear Islam more than Hispanics.
Again, we have to build up our civilizational confidence and demand assimilation into American society. That means English only, study of American history and political system, and no coddling.
On July 27th, 2008 at 5:14 pm, JHSII said:
Still at it, eh?
I had not even addressed you here before you wondered on and whined that you were being attacked, so no, that doesn’t wash.
I was addressing someone who had stated, out of what they believed to be “conservative principals”: “…I will do everything in my power to convince people to vote for Obama.”
I then stated that helping a leftist like Obama was not an inherently conservative position.
And you launched in to a never-ending whine fest that you were being “attacked”.
Attacking a non conservative position is not an attack on conservatives and pointing that out with someone else isn’t an attack on you. That hasn’t stopped you from making a complete ass out of yourself because someone else posted something that you disagree with, yet you can’t articulate a reasoned response to other then to call it lies and trolling.
Want to know why I have strung you along? Because I hope that people will see the quality of your “argument” as nothing more then bandwagon hopping and running with the crowd. I am hoping that some people will see what you have written here and quietly want to distance themselves from that mindset. I suspect that every time you complain that you have been attacked when I had blissfully forgotten that you exist, or every time you ask a question that has been answered a dozen times, or every time you be clown yourself with a display like you have indulged in this afternoon you reinforce yourself as the negative example of unthinking, dogmatic adherence to a bad, anti-conservative idea that I have routinely pointed out here.
Indeed, you are your own worst enemy and apparently you just can’t help demonstrating it.
Come on you guys, stop. We are on the same page here! I think that there is some misunderstanding and communication errors which are leading to this animosity.
We can see that we all want the same thing for America, and that letting Obama win will not secure that, but weaken it.
We can also agree that, as conservatives, we are deeply disappointed in John McCain, and in his winning the nomination.
However, we also see that we will have to hold our noses and vote for McCain in order to keep Obama out of the White House. It’s only reasonable and realistic.
Now, we should work together toward that end, and stop the fighting!
.
I’m reminded of the commenter “Mr. Conservative Cat” who spiraled out of control a while back. Toward the end he really began to rant at other commenters like a madman and after one last, bizarre trip down a road paved with four letter words got himself booted.
Here here.
Actually, using war as an analogy, people typically detests traitors far more than the enemy. This is held as a rational view because a single traitor often causes far more harm than the enemy could ever hope to.
atheling #232
I have been saying that. Bill’s problem is that I was defending Michelle Malkin against some attacks by Irish Rose, and he deicded that I was the enemy. Ever since then he’s been the one attacking and berating me.
Ok. No problem.
That’s pretty much my reason, although I would add that I would tighten it down a little bit just to keep people from saying “her life was at risk” when it really wasn’t. Trust me, I now how lawyers operate, sadly enough
I’m just not sure how far McCain is willing to push the war. Obama, on the other hand, I see raising the white flag and calling it victory.
I can’t tell what McCain wants at this point. But yes, the Republicans listening to us would be better. I might even become a Republican again if they started to show some backbone.
I actually wonder if a lot of our so-called democratic allies are either A) democratic or B) our allies. It’s a shame that I have to wonder about that.
You might be better off asking them why they keep attacking me. Although I believe that if you did that then they would start attacking you too.
This is why I keep asking Bill the question he refuses to answer. The answer is simple:
How is attacking Conservatives like me supposed to make us want to vote for or support McCain?
Answer: It doesn’t.
Sigh.
No problem.
and in post #235 Bill admits that he’s been trolling.
Of course, he did it with his usual spate of lies and attacks, but that was to be expected. SOP Bill Grant.
This is the same argument that’s been going on for months here, and it always end the same stupid way, with people abusing each other and making petty little ‘you said this’ ‘but you said this’ circular arguments that go nowhere.
Fact is, Obama IS worse than McCain – a more extreme version you might say. I think we all admit to that. The dispute is more over whether we should vote for McCain in order to stop Obama getting in (imho that’s where most of his votes are coming from anyway).
Yes, there is some logic in voting for McCain for this reason. HOWEVER, some of us have become more than a little tired of having to hold our noses and vote for someone we would never normally vote for, only because the other person is even worse.
Some of us have decided enough is enough – if it isn’t Obama, it’ll just be someone else in 4 years time and again we’ll be faced with the same kind of choice.
Some of us have decided we will not continue on this path.
IF YOU CANNOT ACCEPT THAT, THEN LEAVE. Your comments, abuse, derision and bullying will not change that. Agree to disagree and leave it at that. Surely the last couple of months should’ve bought you to the conclusion that what you are doing here is absolutely futile, and if anything, only serves to strengthen each other’s convictions. JUST LAY OFF IT, ok? Please? Can you do that?
My friends. I know people are afraid to call McAmnesty a traitor becuase they are impressed by his prison time…but I do think that there is a good chance in the future he will be listed as a patriot and a hero… in MEXICAN textbooks! Which will be read by the proud anchor babies of illegal aliens, in the Spanish language, in the capitol city of Mexifornia, Los Angeles.
To call a man who has dedicated 50 years of his life to service of the United States, including service that involved being tortured to the point where he can’t raise his arms over his head a “traitor” is inherently irrational and completely unfair. Regardless of his lousy bill. Working to actively promote someone with 143 days of legitimate work experience, which is what I was referring to over this man is also inherently irrational.
No, promoting the most liberal senator in congress out of the misguided notion that you are somehow adhering to consirvative principals is not a rational course of action.
For the record – I would rather have someone I could vote for than electing someone just because I have to vote against someone else.
Bill enough already, you’ve said your piece.
My friends. Supporting the invasion of the USA by Mexico is inherently irrational and completely unfair… but Juan McAmnesty is going ahead full steam with Presidente Bush’s and La Raza’s plan to become one with Mexico… traitorous… maybe… misguided, stupid, fool-headed, destructive, asinine, and anti-American… YES!
So let the perfect be the enemy of “we can have a fighting chance with this.” Who isn’t “tired” of picking the least bad alternative? It has always been that way and probably always will be. Humans are inherently imperfect. Holding out for perfection is going to mean a long wait or that you are being lied to if someone is promising it.
This is the United States you are talking about throwing up your hands on. Sorry, I think it is too important to give up on and turn over to people who will alter what this country is and what it stands for because of a prolonged sulk.
You can chose whatever path you want. There are consequences to your decision though, don’t kill the messenger because he is pointing them out.
If your decision is so fragile that you can’t bear to hear a counterargument perhaps you should reexamine it.
There are 2 viable candidates for president of the United States. Barack Obama and John McCain. That is where we are at this juncture. Helping Obama win is certainly your prerogative. Lots of people are doing it. Just don’t kid yourself that you are doing it out of conservative principals.
According to my old Webster’s dictionary a traitor is:
One who betrays one’s country, a cause or a trust, esp. one who commits treason.
So one doesn’t have to betray ones country to be considered a traitor, and I think that people can legitimately claim that McCain is a traitor at least to a cause and a trust, and considering the nature of shamnesty, a weaker case could be made of country.
Also, though I don’t personally consider McCain a traitor to the country, (he’s at least once removed from that title since we’re not at war with Central and South America), I should point out that being a celebrated war hero doesn’t preclude one from also being a traitor. Benedict Arnold was a war here, too, and in his own mind he probably had good intentions for what he did; so malicious intent isn’t a requirement either.
I’m not trying to argue that McCain is a traitor to the country, as I said, but I can understand the sentiments of some of the people here and don’t consider it to be an irrational view—although voting FOR Obama is a bit of a stretch.
Still, anybody who honestly considers themselves a Republican or conservative who’s made a personal determination that they don’t like the direction their own side is headed and, taking the long view, makes a strategic decision to try and put a stop to it—who can honestly say for sure that their plan won’t work? In the long term it’s possible that the country would be much better off. It’s a gamble, but part of the argument here is between the short and long view.
…and then there’s Irish Rose, who thinks that law and order is tantamount to racism.
Isn’t a long view when you have a scope rather than iron sights?
Depends on how good your eyes are.
“I can hit the broad side of Rosanne Barr at a thousand yards!!”
On July 27th, 2008 at 7:16 pm, FloatingRock said:
Well floatingrock yes, “claims” and a case could be made for many things by “people” as I suspect you have already realized. (What also floats in water? Uh, very small rocks.. So, logically… If… she… weighs… the same as a duck,… she’s made of wood… and therefore? A witch!) Whether or not the case has merit…
I think we have actually seen an authentic “traitorous” acts in recent years: Harry Reid declaring the surge failed while Americans were fighting and dying in Iraq. Nancy Pelosi declaring the war lost as well. Barack Obama publicly siding against the military while they were in the field fighting for the USA. Deliberately losing the war on islamists who attacked us in order to score a few domestic political points is the very definition of traitorous.
McCains immigration bill was stupid. “It was worse than a crime; it was a mistake” as I believe Talleyrand said. Of course if you are going to label him a “traitor” (Or make the case as you deliberately state in order to not leave me an opening.) for it you best do the same with Reagan who signed the largest authentic Amnesty bill in US history.
Pro rational enforcement people are going to have to actually get organized and involved in the process, which is something that conservatives and the 80% of the American public who favor tighter immigration control simply have not done. If we don’t then there is no one who has let ourselves down other then ourselves. We haven’t been betrayed, we have been lazy and afraid of what others might say.
That said, catapulting babies and disrespecting veterans, etc. is something that I will not cozy up to.
Either way, the choice will be simple, get moving or deal with the consequences. The other side isn’t afraid to make themselves heard. So setting that issue aside… I would suggest we look at the genuine traitorous acts and see if that is something we want to reward.
McCain is an absolute disgrace.
in that speech in Denver, in an attempt to pander shamelessly to hispanics who are rejecting him in droves, he insulted all non-hispanic soldiers and vets by singling out hispanics as more worthy of his praise than all the millions of white, black, asian, etc who have served this country over the centuries.
McShame is disgusting. and all the whining by repube-ics like wiseman and others won’t convince conservatives to support someone who does not support them.
and btw,
not one word from McShame on that illegal alien triple murder in SF, and that sanctuary policy that he could gain millions of votes by railing against and submitting a bill to stop.
but, he does not want votes from THOSE people, you know, real middle America citizens who are the backbone of this country. we are not God’s children, illegal aliens are, according to Juan McShame
Bill, imperfect is one thing, disastrous is quite another. I am sick of your arrogant self-righteous demands that we vote for McCain, and accusations that we are voting for Obama if we don’t do what you say.
How about a taste of your own medicine:
YOU are the one throwing up your hands and giving up on OUR country and turning it over to people who will alter what this country is and what it stands for by voting for either McCain OR Obama.
YOU are clearly the one having a prolonged sulk because most people here won’t agree with your version of logic. There are consequences to your decision though BILL, so don’t kill the messengers (namely almost everyone registered to this site) because we are pointing out what you are voting for rather than against.
If your decision is so fragile that you can’t bear to hear a counterargument perhaps you should reexamine it.
There are 2 completely unviable candidates for president of the United States. Barack Obama and John McCain. That is where we are at this juncture. Helping Obama OR McCain win is certainly your prerogative, if you are happy living your life knowing that you willingly handed over the sovereignty of the United States because you were sulking. Just don’t kid yourself that you are doing it out of conservative principals.
right, Rob #243. the unholy cabal of Bush, McCain, Kennedy, obama, goober graham, vicente Fox, numerous corporate sellouts, etc and on and on.
it is basically the Alamo, part 2.
with those sovereignty sellouts I listed above and many more all marching with Santa Anna and trying to overthrow the will of the American people who are fighting desperately and valiantly to hold off the hordes.
except, the so-called leaders of this country are not only NOT sending reinforcements, they are openly colluding with the invaders.
to them the Alamo is nothing more than a rental car company.
You’re welcome FloatingRock. That one has always been one of my favorites. The Pledge of Allegiance by Red Skelton is pretty good too.
On July 27th, 2008 at 8:41 pm, nyc123me said:
Where have I made such a “demand? I am simply trying to illuminate the territory we are in. Want to hear “arrogant?”: “Bill enough already, you’ve said your piece.”
And you are?
Those are your viable choices. Hitting that ‘ol shift key won’t change that. I have not and wont give up on the United States. I intend to keep swinging no matter what. The course of acction I have advocated for is the exact opposite of giving up. Elect who I think conservatives can have the most influence on and keep at him every step of the way. It is what we shoiuld have been doing all along.
Break the argument then, out logic it. Prove me wrong. Just don’t complain that I have said something you don’t want to hear. Show me how we can get Reagan back instead of saying that it is OK to let Carter win.
Your perception, if you are endorsing the prevailing attitude here (I donno this is the first we have interacted.) is skewed to the surreal. There have been some here who have openly hoped for McCain to be killed. Is that something you wish to identify yourself with?
What I am voting for is the 20% fight as in: “As a citizen, I would rather have a President McCain that we fight with 20 percent of the time than a President Clinton or a President Obama who we fight with 90 percent of the time.” -Newt Gingrich
The caveat is that I am going to have to suck it up and do the fighting instead of just flipping the lever and being done with it. You know, because it doesn’t work that way.
Lets have a counterargument then. From what I can distill from this you are advocating for not voting for anybody and are rankled because I have decided to advocate for one of the candidates. What is your counterargument?
What do you want to bet that one of them is president on the 21st of January 2009? Seriously, I will give you odds.
Your trying to give me a “taste of my own medicine” kind of falls apart from there on in.
Hokie smokes…This is completely unreal. I cannot believe that this is still going on!
In case you guys didn’t realize it, it is a beautiful Sunday in late July…Summer slipping away quickly. I have been out on a long bike ride with one of my daughters, where we even stopped to get a smoothy, took a nap, watched a COUPLE of movies, played with my other daughter…even had a big bowl of Cinnamon Honey Bunches of Oats with about 3 teaspoons of sugar on it to really bring out the flavor…
And you guys are still carrying on here like a bunch of rejects from Miss Pat’s Playhouse with ADD.
Do any of you really believe that:
A) You are going to change either of your minds and switch opinions?
B) You are doing either the Republican/Conservative sides ANY good in the eyes of all the Liberals that monitor this site?
C) That you are making Michelle look good in the eyes of said idots who will use this 100+ tantrum of a comment streak against her in some inane fashion?
Seriously…go get in your car, or get on a bike, or even just put on your trainors and go and get some frozen yogurt, sit on a nice grassy patch or at a picnic table and take a freaking break already.
This has gone WAY beyond ridiculous and into the realm of a tantrum on Kos.
And frankly, while I do not speak for the rest of us, I do feel I can be relatively safe in saying YOU ARE BORING THE HELL OUT OF US!!!
Now have a nice Sunday evening.
Something to think about the next time your sweet daughter is out riding her bike. I’ll bet the parents of the little girl in the article would love “to get a smoothy, took a nap, watched a COUPLE of movies, played with my other daughter…even had a big bowl of Cinnamon Honey Bunches of Oats with about 3 teaspoons of sugar on it to really bring out the flavor…”
But it doesn’t sound like they will have that chance, does it?
If they have eyes to see with and ears to hear with, yes, I do.
You know Rob…you’re an ass.
ack.. I dragged myself into this stupidity, now I’m taking myself out. There’s no arguing with a fanatic.
Concur.
So much for a counterargument…
Meanwhile…
2 points. one, this blog, or any other blog, depends on posts and page views for success. so, empty space ’cause one guy is “bored’ is not good.
second, who gives a flying eff what “liberals who monitor this site” think or say.
Neither of those men are viable candidates.
get real about McCain. the senate will be dem-dominated, almost with 60 votes.
any Supreme court nominee will have to pass muster with them. that means that even if McShame won, the best he could get out of them is another Anthony Kennedy or 2. and that is no better than the libs on the court now, ’cause Kennedy is constantly siding with the libs in 5-4 votes.
Counterarguments have been made many times Bill, as I have observed. You just have a blindfold on, and respond with the same thing over and over again. It’s like talking to a brick wall. There is no point continuing with you.
or I could just say ‘ditto’.
Well, Redfireman
Well, RetFireman, you can call me a name if you want. At first I thought your screen name was “Red”Fireman, but now I see it is “Ret”. If I was as small as you are I might think that “Ret” stood for retarded…
However, I will just stick with my point. While some of us our out riding our bikes pretending that the country isn’t being invaded, others are simply pointing it out…
I hope your daughter has a nice bike ride today………
What the F? There should be no Debate, Illegals don’t get a license, they get deported. Debate done.
Every damn cop car should have a bumper sticker that reads: You Report, We deport. Who’s next?
On July 28th, 2008 at 3:53 am, nyc123me said:
So what is yours?
Why stop now?
On July 27th, 2008 at 11:29 pm, flenser said:
viable
One entry found.
viable
Main Entry:
vi·a·ble
Etymology:
French, from Middle French, from vie life, from Latin vita
Date:
circa 1832
c (1): having a reasonable chance of succeeding
In this case “succeeding” means getting elected president so yes, seeing as one of them will be elected president, probably Obama due to part to the fact that the opposition have united around their candidate who decided he was ready to be president after 143 days in the senate, at this point the sentence was correct.
So, “Viable” and “Socialism”… You are having a good vocabulary summer ain’t cha?
Bill you are clearly only here to antagonize. What’s the point? Does it make you feel like a real man?
I want McAmnesty to tell Daniellee Bologna why he’s for the illegals getting amnesty. Why isn’t McAmnesty Jamiel Shaw’s law????? WHY WHY WHY?
McInsane is not worth one vote until he can explain to Danielle Bologna why these gang banger illegal invaders deserve a pass.
Get to explaining McAmnesty, only 100 days left.
*why isn’t McAmnesty supporting Jamiel’s Law?
No rob, you took what was a nicve thing, and made some political statement out of it as a way to diminish/demean it.
For one thing, I am more than aware of the laws broken daily by the illegals. For you to insinuate anything else shows that you are an incredibly insensetive person, as well as someone who has not paid ANY attention to anything I have written on said issue.
So while you may stand by what you have put out there, I will also stand by what I have said and stick with the fact that you are an ass.
On July 28th, 2008 at 2:28 pm, nyc123me said:
Wrong and Still not a counterargument.
To get you to persuade me that it is better for the USA and conservative principals to have an Obama presidency.
dummy, principals are the guys who run a school.
principles are the conservative core beliefs.
Amen to that, and thanks for the compliment.
Yes, let’s be sensitive to the illegals, and let’s worry about why the Muslims don’t like us, and let’s go to Europe and make speeches about holding hands and making a one world order.
I sure as hell would hate to be insensitive about illegal alien killers and hurt your feelings.
Rob:
I don’t think you get it. Your initial comment to Retfireman was incredibly creepy and uncalled for. I have noticed that your posts regarding illegals are getting stranger and stranger – like you are obsessed.
I don’t want illegals either, but I don’t go out of my way to make disgusting and crass statements like you do.
I’m thinking that Irish Rose was right when she called you a bigot. You’ve gone over to the dark side, dude.
You need help.
McShame supporters are disgusting. now they are calling guys bigots if they don’t fall in line with the “poor little illegals are God’s children” bs that McShame spouts daily.