The return of McAmnesty the Democrat Suck-Up
Ugh.
Sorry to spoil your Monday morning, but John McCain is off to a cringe-inducing start this week. While Sarah Palin is galvanizing the conservative base and attracting tens of thousands to her rallies, John McCain is…
*Pandering to the open-borders lobby again. At a rally in Scranton this morning, he was bragging about the shamnesty bill again and revisiting the “path to citizenship” for illegal alien Irish, illegal alien Hispanics, and every last illegal border-crosser, visa-overstayer, deportation fugitive, and immigration enforcement evader in the country:
“We cannot have a continuing situation where there are 12 million people in this country illegally with broken borders,” McCain said. “We’ve also got to have a temporary worker program… It didn’t make me the most popular member of my own party, and it almost cost me the nomination of my party.”
“We have to give people a path to citizenship, a way that they can become citizens,” said McCain, adding the caveat that illegal immigrants cannot get in front of people seeking citizenship through legal challenges. “I’ve got a record of reform, of standing up against my own party, my own president when necessary. ”
McCain maintains that while he took a stand, his rival, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, “took a hike” on the issue. (Obama has supported the immigration reforms.)
“Sen Obama has never once stood up against the leaders of his own party, never once,” McCain said. “There are 50,000 Irish men and women who are in this country illegally at this time… who want to become citizens… I want to assure you that I will enact comprehensive immigration reform…. I will do it for this nation, because this nation is all the stronger – this nation is stronger for the fresh infusion of vitality” of the immigrants, including Hispanic immigrants, who have “enriched our nation.”
And they cheered.
Yup. He’s in perfect sync with shamnesty buddy Geraldo Rivera, who was on the lecture circuit lobbying for the same goal and urging President Bush to “pardon” the upwards of 20 million illegal aliens in this country.
*And wait. That’s not all. McCain is also back to his reaching-across-the-aisle, Democrat-suck-up ways — promoting Andrew Cuomo as the man he’s install at the SEC.
Andrew Cuomo? One of the Clinton corruptocrats responsible for ushering in the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac debacle?
Quin Hilyer shakes his head:
Last night, John McCain said this on 60 Minutes about who should run the SEC:
(PELLEY ) I’m curious. If you wanna fire Chris Cox, the chairman of the SEC, who would you replace him with?
(MCCAIN) This may sound a little– unusual, but I’ve admired– Andrew Cuomo. I think he is somebody who could– restore some credibility, lend some bipartisanship– to this effort.
(PELLEY) He’s a Democrat.
(MCCAIN) Oh, yes.
(PELLEY) He served in the cabinet of President Clinton.
(MCCAIN) Yes. And he did a good job. And he has respect. And he has prestige.
A good job??? Cuomo??? Maybe McCain needs to read this.
Yes, this is the left-wing Village Voice on Andrew Cuomo:
Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded “kickbacks” to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.
Maybe McCain needs to lay low until Election Day and let Sarah do the talking.
If you are dreading the upcoming presidential debate, you are not the only one.
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
- Traitor scum sleaze McCain at it again… Please God, let him die! | The TIW Blog
- Traitor scum sleaze McCain at it again… Please God, let him die! | The TIW Blog
- Traitor scum sleaze McCain at it again… Please God, let him die! | The TIW Blog
- No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » The Scramble - 9/22/2008
- 2 Palin Steps Forward, 1 . . . Make That 2 McCain Steps Backwards « Gunservatively!
- BlueRidgeForum » Shaky Economics; Bad Energy; Worse Diplomacy.
- Michelle Malkin » The Gaffe Twins strike again
- Laigle’s Forum » Blog Archive » Does pro-life have to mean anti-sovereignty?
- Hee Hee: I don’t know who is worse, Biden or Obama, but they are gaffetastic | Right Voices
- Save Our Biden–Rush Rick Roll « Pronk Palisades
- Phoney Political Polls–Just Flip It Off–McCain 55% vs. Obama 40% « Pronk Palisades
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Amnesty, John McCain, Subprime crisis
Sister Toldjah
» The anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall – and how the far left still hasn’t given up
Pundit & Pundette
» Intelligence agencies knew Hasan was a traitorLegal Insurrection
» Will The Truth Be Hasan's Last Victim?The Powers That Be
» US Intel Knew Hasan Was Trying to Contact Al QaedaRiehl World View
» MSNBC's Shuster Links Fred Phelps To Republicans, ConservativesStop The ACLU
» How Can One Write About The 20th Anniversary Of The Fall Of The Berlin Wall And Not Mention Reagan?
The problem they seem to ignore is that the labor is only cheap to the farmers. The cost of health care, illegals clogging up the emergency rooms, the children clogging up the schools and paying no taxes to cover their children, the crime and the fact they send a huge percentage of their income to Mexico. And that’s only a partial list.
McCain – It’s NOT cheap labor!
And every human everywhere is a child of God, do we give the entire world citizenship? It’s just incredible that we’re having to even have this discussion! It’s a no-brainer. Don’t reward illegal behavior!
The only way RINOs will learn is if we make them pay. If we allow the Republican Party to become totally destroyed, RINO traitors like John McCain will finally learn that they will not get elected running as Republican Democrats.
It will hurt, but we might be forced to vote for Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama
Flyover:
Dr.: I understand the frustration. However, my opinion is that the alternative is too dangerous to be allowed.
I just heard that Barack said today that he will run a clean government while McCain works for special interests. Pot calling the kettle…something.
I wasn’t quoting myself, I just didn’t highlight the right text before I hit quote, and we can’t edit on here. Sorry!
Anyway… meanwhile there’s a number of PUMA voting for McCain/Palin to protest the DNC’s treatment of Hillary. And I’m sure there are some Dems who are holding their nose and voting Obama.
Too bad we couldn’t have all gotten together at the start of this and agreed to write in a third choice, since so many people are lesser-eviling or holding their nose or protest-voting. That would have sent a clear message.
Well now I know where to put my money when WAMU falls.
So what are you going to do about it Michelle Malkin, except help elect Obama?
Why is it we never get a Barack Obama illegal alien post?
Look who is linking to this: “Traitor scum sleaze McCain at it again… Please God, let him die!” | The TIW Blog
Lets reward Harry Reid, lets reward David Axelrod, lets reward Kos and Pelosi and all the rest and get a real Amnesty as well and elect Obama. He is already ahead in the polls, why not? It is a whole lot easier then actually pushing for enforcement.
If Obama gets elected, so be it. But I will not vote for McCain.
I expect this tactic from Obummer but I will not accept it from what is supposed to be the conservative party.
It’s hypocritical to say you advocate for American workers and the middle class while at the same time you allow millions to break the law and steal their jobs and social services.
Tough love baby. Someone has to have a backbone and say to hell with the lesser of two evils. That will be me even if I have to stand alone.
Expres 12, consider me standing by your side.
I viewed a statement from the Vatican that said I could vote for the least damaging of candidates. I heard them say that while two support abortion, the one who wishes restrictions is the better candidate. So, I am to choose a candidate who wants open borders because I fear Obama?… Is Obama that powerful? or are the people of this country so weak, they won’t revolt. I suspect the latter. There was Civil War once…. why are so many afraid of another one… what will you sacrifice?
John Ansell,
There are a lot more of us than the RNC realizes.
And Growing, Virginia Patriot.
Bill Grant,
Your argument is with McCain. He’s the one out of step with the voters on this issue. If he loses because of it, it will be his own fault. He could have chosen to side with the citizens instead of the illegal aliens and their employers. If he was running on enforcement, he’d be 10 points up.
John and Virginia Patriot, united we stand…
I agree. Don’t try saying such things on hotair.com though… You’ll get things like, “What EXACTLY is your position in the Obama campaign hierarchy?” Or, my favorite, “You should embrace your POS-ness, and STFU”. (The poster of the latter comment then tried to explain how that sentence was somehow not an ad hominem fallacy.)
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” ~John Quincy Adams
I hope Sarah will bail out and say, I cannot support this excuse of a Conservative… but I know she has character and will stand… would that I had her courage.
This book may interest you. “None of the Above: Why 2008 Is the Year to Cast the Ultimate Protest Vote by Joseph Farah“
On September 22nd, 2008 at 7:53 pm, Virginia Patriot said:
My argument is with morons who think that the best way prevent an Amnesty is to help elect someone who is open borders. My argument is with idiots who acknowledge that they don’t stand a chance of stopping amnesty under an Obama presidency, yet don’t miss any opportunity to rant against the man running against him. My argument is with the backstabber’s who want to elect a socialist, islamist appeasing, war losing, lying, America resenting criminal and who have either lied to themselves that they are doing it out of conservative principals or who are lying to the rest of us that they have those principals at all.
On September 22nd, 2008 at 8:06 pm, Send_Me said:
Joseph Farah just wants us to stop supporting Israel while they defend themselves against Syria and Hizbullah in Lebanon. He knows Obama will do just that.
After reading these, let me know if you’d like to reconsider such a statement.
“If I Were Prime Minister of Israel”
“Arab Leaders Caused Refugee Problem”
“Why God Won’t Allow Israel to Perish”
“The Hezbollah coup in Lebanon”
“Hamas, Hezbollah: ‘Legitimate claims’?“
This guy doesn’t want to be president very bad does he? I just talked myself into voting for him when he picked Sarah as his VP candidate, then he goes and opens he’s dumb a$$ mouth again. I am honestly questioning, again if I will vote for him. Juan just told his base to shove it once again.
Bill Grant,
The backstabber is the one we won’t vote for because he is a backstabber. I’d rather oppose someone I know is against me than someone who says he’s “my friend”.
On September 22nd, 2008 at 8:50 pm, Send_Me said:
Fine, reconsidered: He is an idiot who thinks you gain influence by losing elections. Better?
On September 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 pm, Virginia Patriot said:
Spare me; it is down to Obama and McCain and Obama is ahead. You have whined and whined about Amnesty and when you were offered a course of action to stop it you showed absolutely no internist. When asked about your plan for stopping it under an Obama presidency you acknowledge that there isn’t any. When asked to come up with some solution to the immigration problem that can be implemented under an Obama presidency you drop the thread only to come out spewing the same BS on the next one.
This isn’t about principles, this is either about a prolonged temper tantrum or a deceitful campaign to split the McCain vote and elect Obama. There is no rational, conservative argument for electing Barack Obama.
Just the way I feel about you at the moment. Lets face it, if this were about actually getting off your ass and “opposing” anything the choice would STILL be McCain because McCain is closer to “conservative” or “patriotic” or even “decent” values then Obama. If you are going to “oppose” doesn’t it make sense to chose the opponent that you have to do the least work opposing? Rocket Science, I know… As it is you sound like a self righteous fool who is determined to undercut everything that you supposedly stand for because you steadfastly refuse to see the obvious. The only question left is whether you are mentally inverted or lying.
1. I’m glad to see that you’ve reconsidered. Before calling him names though, you may wish to consider what he has to say in his book. Here’s a summary of his position.
2. You forget that not all people who believe in preserving the Constitution, ensuring our sovereignty, making government smaller and more efficient, enacting a more just tax system, building a strong national defense/foreign policy in line with Natan Sharansky’s “The Case for Freedom” that uses all forms of strategic power (diplomatic, information, military, and economic), and preserving our Christian heritage in this country is a Republican. These ideas are not Republican ideas. They are the right ideas. If the Republicans are wrong, then I won’t vote for them. It’s that simple. The Democrats have been wrong on these ideas as well, so I’m not voting for them either.
3. The best indicator of future performance is past and present performance. We know what McCain will do. We shouldn’t delude ourselves. So, given that, why vote for he who is running under the auspices of being a “true conservative”, and have him damage the country and drag all “conservatives” through the mud with him? I’d sooner have Obama damage the place than McCain because hopefully that would wake people up to the need for something better. If McCain wins, then we’ll have to pick up the pieces from the damage he’s done, and I guarantee a Democrat will win in 2012 and have a greater majority in Congress.
Yup, VPat, had McCain come down on the side of the law, common sense and the overwhelming majority of voters he would have a victory of landlide proportion.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 12:22 am, Send_Me said:
OK fine. A “Summary of his positions. (Been down this road a dozen times, but what’s another trip…) Here is the fatal flaw in his logic and why I think that anyone who thinks like this is a moron and a traitor who should be beaten like a meat pinata:
Firstly, we cannot progress as a country when half of our society is rooting for downfall in order to blame it on the other half. We have witnessed true vermin like Harry Reid rooting for the failure of Americans in Iraq in order to get political mileage out of it. We have seen scum like John Murtha and John Kerry voting to send our troops out on a limb and then trying to cut it out from under them. We have seen Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the cast of traitors behaving exactly the same way as Joseph Farah advocates that WE do. Rooting for the worst in order to pin it on the opposition.
Indeed, I believe that the democrats have helped the worst come about in as many areas as possible in order to point to the “US casualties” or the “lousy economy” as further proof of the need for “change”.
I think this mindset is reprehensible and I refuse to be a part of it. I love this country and don’t want to see it destroyed so that I may be able to exert a little more influence over the rubble.
Morality aside, and know this: It won’t work. It is a race to the bottom and the other side will win this game every time. Why? They don’t make any pretense about caring for the country so no matter how low you are willing to go, they are going to go lower. Gleefully.
Secondly; The whole idea of purifying the party through defeat is a PR trick from Hill & Knowlton that was bought and paid for by the DNC. It was originally intended to keep the republican rubes in flyover-Ville on their tractors come election day. Every time I read or hear someone regurgitate this stupid, stupid, stupid idea I think of Howard Dean at the other end of the conference table grinning as some PR flack explains to him how the suckers will just eat this up in order to have their Reagan back. All this will do is elect the most under qualified, America resenting, strident leftist this country has ever seen and I cannot believe something so transparently manipulative, so obvious is working on some of you.
Thirdly; What obama proposes to do wont be wiped away simply by electing someone who isn’t a scumbag in 4 years. Our sovereignty will already be surrendered to the UN and other international organizations that not only do not have our best interests in mind but have proven over and over again that they hate our guts… and international treaties carry over from administration to administration. The entitlement programs that Obama rams down our throats wont be taken away. (Name an established entitlement program that has been taken away from the American people, ever. I double dog dare you.) The socialization of entire industries will still be there. The fact that he will need to push our national debt over the our GDP in order to get what he wants will effectively render our dollar worthless. That will all outlast him and that is only if he serves 4 years…
Lets say he sells a dishonorable withdrawal from Iraq as his success. Lets say the islamists lay off because we have someone willing to sell out Israel. Lets say he gives out “stimulus packages” to the crack heads and the parasites, tacking it on to our debt. Lets say he creates a bunch of government jobs, which have people depending on his administration for employment… And yes AMNESTY. He could easily string this in to 8 years and forever alter the character of the USA into something that is unrecognizable as the country my father fought to build.
Lastly; YOU DO NOT GAIN INFLUENCE BY LOSING ELECTIONS! The idea that you do is just categorically stupid. Election losses knock a party back on it’s heels which is one of the main reasons the democrats need to lose. If they do the tactics of trash the country to get political points might be abandoned for something less reprehensible. The Kos kids and the code pinks might see that their brand of s*it isn’t being bought. The colleges and media might try not insulting our intelligence by pushing indoctrination rather then education or information. Subhuman cesspools like Harry Reid may get purged and Madonna may stay in goddamned London. I am bot promising all of that but at the very least THEY WILL NOT HAVE BEEN REWARDED FOR TRYING TO DRAG THE COUNTRY DOWN TO REMAKE IT IN THEIR IMAGE… Exactly what Joseph “cheesy stash” Farrah proposes that we do.
One more thing: If Obama IS elected president I will choke back my vomit and work trough my tears to see to it that the son of a b*tch is as easy on this country as possible. I will have j
ust as muchMORE resentment for supposed conservatives willing to trash the USA in order to get their own way because YOU OUGHT TO KNOW BETTER. This is the United States we are talking about. That some of you are willing to just roll over and allow what is going to happen under this man to happen to this country identifies you as cut from the same cloth as those that you supposedly oppose.On September 22nd, 2008 at 8:50 pm, Send_Me said:
Obama has shown no interest in “preserving the constitution”. He sees it as a “living document” which means that it it signifies whatever he wants it to signify at any given moment.
Obama has shown no interest in ensuring our sovereignty, he is perfectly willing to sign it over to international organizations in order to be “liked” by the europeans.
Come on…
Your choice of viable candidates is McCain or Obama. That is where we are. Your choice at this point is a fighting chance to preserve what you supposedly think are “good ideas” or capitulation to those who want to wipe the slate clean. Ill take the fighting chance.
I would sooner neither damage the USA but you are correct: “The best indicator of future performance is past and present performance.” John McCain has demonstrated with his life that he loves the United States and Obama has demonstrated that he loves himself. I am not saying that he is the perfect candidate but I believe that he is a good man who has shown that he will listen to the American people and try to do what is right. Obama will do what is right for Obama. Like a dog marking hs territory on the lawn Obama wants to change this country in ways that are unacceptable to create it in his image.
That is why I am going to vote for McCain and keep the pressure on him and the rest of the government to do the right thing for the United States and why I think that the course of action that Joseph Farrah is cowardly, underhanded and will result in the exact opposite of what he and you supposedly seek to achieve.
Some of us live in this country and don’t want to see it dragged down.
Bill – unfortunately, in this case, it’s not so much society as those who would lead it. The would-be leaders of both “halves” are obsessed with sending America on a quick handbag to Hades in a massive amnesty giveaway. Certainly McCain seems obsessed – the very odd relativistic grasp for moral equivalency re: “illegal Irish immigrants” is incredibly absurd.
I agree “let the other party get blamed” is not good as a game plan. But I think that’s the end result no matter the party or the issue when the chipped beef hits the fan bigtime – on amnesty, the economy, defense, terrorism or whatever – Americans, rightly or wrongly, will want to see heads roll. That’s the way it’s always been – i.e. “it happened on your watch”.
The baffling thing here on McCain’s part is why is he pushing Amnesty full speed ahead now when there are issues that he’s right on and that Americans’ support him on where he could be making hay? With Gov. Palin wowing & winning the public with populist common-sense conservatism does he feel he needs to “run against Palin” to bring “balance”? Pushing the ill-advised, unpopular amnesty now should be at the very bettom of his ‘to do” list. If he’s running to win, that is.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 3:09 am, purplepeep said:
I do not want Illegals here, Irish, Mexican or whatever else.
We are going to eventually (in time) have to fight McCain on Amnesty or we are going to have to fight Obama on everything from day 1. There are ways and strategies that I have laid out to fight amnesty under a McCain presidency in conjunction with pro enforcement organizations. There is simply no way I can think of to stop it under Obama. If you can, tell me and Ill shut up the next time we get a gratuitous shamnisty(tm) post.
Of course this means getting involved, organized and active. If we don’t it will be no ones fault but ours when all the illegals are made legal.
We do. It is called, “Don’t break the law!”
There are specific things that people can do, have been doing for DECADES to become citizens. Breaking the law to come here is NOT one of them, nor should it ever be. If anything, it should be an automatic disqualification stipulation for ANY new or old legislation.
Well, illegals and the ACLU will be marching on our local courthouse this weekend.
Why? Because our sheriff won’t be “fired” by the county commissioners for making accurate statements about the illegal population in this area.
Just imagine what this will be like when McCain is president….they will expect what he has promised.
Many of us will be joining in protest of illegals having any rights this weekend.
Bet there will be fireworks and worse.
Thanks to the pandering weasels in Washington……OUR freedoms are at stake.
My point was that no matter which party does the wrong thing, pushing amnesty or whatever ills, that party is going to get the blame. That’s not a ratinale to vote for/against any person or a reason to rejoice if it’s the opposition who gets the blame, It’s just an observation.
There’s a problem in that line of reasoning, Bill; it absolves responsibility and excuses the actions of elected officials who make wrong decisions. If the McCain-Kennedy Amnesty bill had passed last year despite the massive involvement, organization and activity against it, it would have been no one’s fault other than the politicians who pushed it through.
Despite the wisdom and hard efforts of the majority of Americans, history has shown that elected officials will still do the wrong thing. I imagine you can think of endless examples of this unfortunately all too common historical phenomena.
—John McCain, official stance per his website as of Sept. 23, 2008
—Barack Obama, official stance per his website as of Sept. 23, 2008
—Ronald Reagan, statement on Nov. 6, 1986
—Colonel Sanders, Sept. 23, 2008
I thought Colonel Sanders was dead. Did ACORN bring him back to life to vote for Obama?
‘Morning Bill Grant.
Much of what you say makes sense to me. We have two candidates, both with flaws. Obama – who will destroy the United States as we know it; and McCain who has taken a stance on immigration and a few other issues that are in direct conflict with conservative values.
This election is one of the most critical in the history of the United States. If Obama gets elected he will have the support of democrat lawmakers in both the senate and congress to implement sweeping and detrimental changes that will be virtually irreversible. He will also stack the Supreme Court for a generation or more. McCain has a few odious ideas but he will not destroy the country. McCain will have to fight a democrat majority to get any laws passed – including amnesty – and we stand a chance in shutting him down on those issues.
Anyone who thinks that allowing Obama to be elected so that conservatism will be re-energized in 2012 does not understand the serious harm that Obama will do to this country in the next 4 years.
Just a few weeks before one of the most critical elections of our generation. An election where our nation will decide whether or not to turn the most powerful seat in the word over to a MARXIST.
An election that could potentially hand Congress over to marxists, socialists and communists.
An election that might result in the election of a man who will give lifetime appointments to the most radical, left-wing judges in the land.
And MM is still stuck on stupid.
I think Michelle missed the memo that said McCain shouldn’t be scrutinized by conservatives.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 7:31 am, Last Massachusetts Conservative said:
It’s very refreshing to see these truths experessed here, LMC.
There are a number of folks here (myself included) who have struggled to get these points across to our hostess and some of the more hardcore conservatives on this blog for months on end.
Why we would even HAVE to try and convince people here of the dangers of a Marxist administration, I have absolutely no idea.
The stubborn refusal of our hostess and many here to acknowledge these truths – and their determination to bring down the only candidate that can prevent such a tragedy from befalling our nation – simply because “he doesn’t listen to us” is incredibly naive, juvenile and disconcerting.
I guess the problem is, as much as there are those of us who feel that the total ethical definition of conservative has been bowdlerized by McCain, we know we have to vote for him. But, it is sooooo galling… I mean vomit in the mouth galling. But, I know I must vote for the “Maverick”.
The one stuck on stupid is McCain.
I don’t have to vote for amnesty.
Misrepresentation #1:
Neither I nor Joseph Farah is cheering for Obama. I don’t know how to make that any clearer. My whole point is that both candidates suck, so why vote for either of them?
Misrepresentation #2:
Again, I’m not advocating for the destruction of the country. I’d give my life for it. I’m merely saying, whether Obama or McCain gets elected, the results will be the same. I want the best for the country; ergo, I’m not voting for either guy who’s going to try wrecking it. Is McCain’s amnesty ideas an act of love for the country? Was the Gang of 14 acting in love for the country? How about McCain-Feingold and it’s assault on free political speech? How about his support of judges like Sandra Day O’Connor, Ginsburg and Breyer? How about wishing to remove any coercive interrogation techniques from our intelligence professionals? Was that for love of country? How about being pro-life, yet supporting embryonic stem-cell research? Maybe someone should ask him where we get those embryonic stem cells. How about McCain’s advocacy for Global Warming nonsense? Is that for love of country, to tear us down industrially, to regulate even our light bulb choices? I could go on here. Here’s what’s ironic here though: Obama supports the same things here as McCain does, but McCain “love this country” and Obama doesn’t. Obama is a socialist, no doubt. McCain is more of a globalist. Hmmm, do I want a socialist or globalist as president? How about option 3: someone who supports the Constitution, which neither candidate does; someone who supports free speech, which neither candidate does; someone who supports judges who don’t legislate, which neither candidate does; for winning the GWOT and defeating our enemies around the world (McCain has already made enemies in Georgia through his paper tiger support, but that’s normal for the U.S.- yes, the Bolshevik Revolution, Korea, Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, Berlin Wall, Lebanon, Iranian Revolution, Afghanistan 1, Iraq 1, Somalia… we have quite the track record, but I digress), which neither candidate has a firm grasp of doing; and supports getting government out of the way of prosperity, which neither candidate wishes to do (Global Warming?).
Problem:
McCain will say/do whatever he has to do to get elected. For example, why else do you think he picked Palin but to pander to “conservatives”? He says one thing, but does another every chance he gets. This thread, amnesty, is a perfect example of that. Good luck in your efforts to sway him. Frankly, when/if he gets in office, he won’t care about polls or your opinion. Like he says, he’s a “maverick”.
This is for you from a previous conversation.
Addressing forty or so comments ago (yeah, I’m slow on some things)–
On September 22nd, 2008 at 6:27 pm, Flyover State said:
I was just messin’. I should be the one apologizing.
(crickets chirping)
That’s the beauty of the comments here. Immortalized, warts and all. Makes one a little more self-observant when commenting. Well, sorta.
If I only had a bunch of blue noseplugs and red barfbags (see MNUSMCDavid’s September 23rd, 2008 at 8:52 am entry above), I could probably make a buck-fifty on Election Day.
This one’s easy: John McClane for President. He’d be good for homeland security. I’m dubious of his immigration stance, though. (Jeez, how late am I with that joke?)
To LMC: No, ACORN added him fraudulently. Col. Sanders is still dead.
Count me in as well.
I’m probably going to hold my nose and vote for McCain.
I do believe he’s a 3rd term of George Bush in many ways without any assurance that he will appoint conservitve judges to the SCOTUS.
Palin was probably what tipped me in his favor.I would have left that spot blank on the ballot or voted 3rd party before.
But, I have no illusions that she will have any influence on him.
We need to keep his feet to the fire on the amnesty issue and a few more.
I’ll be keeping my eyes on the emails from Numbers USA
On September 23rd, 2008 at 5:27 am, purplepeep said
No. It simply means that there is no excuse for just sitting back and letting the perfect be the enemy of the good… fighting chance.
Indeed, we should be pushing to reform the entire system before hand. Instead “we” are scratching our heads as to whether it is a conservative idea to elect an appeasing socialist.
But it was stopped. It will have to be again if it comes up. I propose that it will be easier to do so with someone who has pledged not to push for it until the governors of the Border States have signed off on the borders being secure. (Which would cost them money) It will be easier to stop with someone who has demonstrated that he will listen to what has been asked of him on a slew of issues. It will be easier to stop with someone who wont write you off as a bitter gun clinging racist for being against it in the first place.
There is no argument to be made that Obama is a better choice to stop amnesty. I have pretty much begged to hear one.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 9:15 am, Virginia Patriot said:
But you ARE voting for amnesty, the fact that you would post that shows that you are indeed stuck on stupid as well.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 9:16 am, Send_Me said:
There is not one blasted thing that I wrote that misrepresents Farahs position. It is tactically stupid and effectively traitorous. It is the same blasted thing that people like Harry Reid have been doing to the country to undermine the Bush administration. Count me out and count on me working to expose it when I see it.
No, you are willing to see him elected because you know he will be a disaster and you think you can squeeze some political mileage out of it. What does that say about your character and your devotion to the country?
That is a cop out, the country deserves better. You will have a chance to mitigate the “suckiness” of McCain and you wont even be a bug on the windshield of Obamas “suckiness”. To say that McCain and Obama are the equivalent of each other is just plain wrong.
No, they will obviously NOT be the same. On the War McCain has been consistently right, Obama has been consistently cowardly. On one side you have one socialist who as served nothing other then his own interests, who has deliberately tried to lose us a war against the monsters that have attacked us, who has pledged to subject our sovereignty to international organizations and ship our wealth out to countries that are… You know what.. I have said it all… dozens of times and I am sick of repeating it. If you can’t see the difference at this point there is something seriously wrong with you.
Yes you are. The choices of viable candidates at this point are Barack Obama, who is winning by the way, and John McCain. Not voting for 1 is a vote for the other because one of them WILL be president at the end of January 2009.
Because there isn’t a viable option 3. Option 3 is either a moonbat truther who wants to withdraw US troops to our borders and legalize drugs from pot to heroin or the anti-sementic clown or Ralph goddamn Nader or any number of other misfit herders who couldn’t be elected homecoming queen. Above and beyond having serious practical drawbacks in terms of crazy political positions Option 3 isn’t a viable option. After the election it will be option 1 or 2 that will be president. And your characterization that McCain doesn’t “support the constitution” is wrong. Indeed, as plebe in the Naval Academy he had to memorize it.
I have been honest with you, tell me; is this about selling the latest Ron Paul?
The fact that he wont shut the hell up about issues like this absolutely proves you wrong.
It shows he listens.
If that is the case it looks like he wont be pushing for an amnesty plan. Your other viable choice is an inveterate liar who has taken every position on every issue and written off his incredible contradictions as “nuance” yet one of the few things he has been consistent on is the fact that he is pro open borders. Indeed, Obama sees himself as a world citizen and those of us who want to protect American sovereignty and exceptionalism as bigoted Neanderthals.
There is no “conservative” case to be made for electing Barack Obama president. In my opinion, the best case that can be made for electing him is one of complete indifference to our country. The one that Farrah makes is worse then that. He seeks to shoot us in the foot in order that we may learn to run faster. No thanks.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 11:06 am, Solo said:
Just makes me sick..
If you stop gulping the McCain kool-aid you’ll feel better.
Here’s what your reps are doing to help the meltdown in the economy and the market-
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/september-8-2008/vote-expected-wednesday-recapturing-unus.html
On September 23rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm, Solo said:
Such a wise retort from someone who demonstrates such a keen decision making ability.
You have been manipulated, duped, had and screwed.
Help elect Obama if you want, but you are not helping conservative principals… Or the USA… Or yourself. You are just helping David Axelrod and George Soros.
Soros owns BOTH candidates. Check where McCain got the money for The Reform Institute.
Soros owns BOTH candidates. Check where McCain got the money for The Reform Institute.
I
Laughed
Hard
You’re the conservative supporting a left of center republican, not I. If anybody here has been had or duped it’s you.
Many times by reach across the isle and his rino brethren. The lote?? Never again.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 3:30 pm, Virginia Patriot said:
McCain resigned from the reform institute and had them take his name off the company information. To say that Soros is either pulling for McCain or not pulling for obama in this election is a provable lie.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 4:55 pm, Solo said:
Fools are amused by what other people find alarming.
No, you are supporting an islamist surrendering, America resenting socialist democrat.
I am not the one who is effectively supporting the most liberal senator or indeed the most liberal person to ever run for president of the USA. Whether or not you are still mindlessly claiming to do it out of adherence to conservative principles at this point is irrelevant, you and yours have no principles. Move to Canada and take your merry band of morons with you.
Voting for a conservative is alarming to You? I should’ve known that you’re nothing more than moderate in a conservative costume just like your hero reach across the isle.
You’re a liar. Go ahead and link my alleged support of obambi. Find one post of mine supporting any of his stupid policies… Just one.
So now it’s effectively, eh? Nice try, Bill. A vote for a third party conservative is NOT support for Obama. However, A vote for a liberal republican is a vote to move the country to the left.
Kinda’ like a so called conservative voting for a liberal republican. Pot meet kettle.
Switch political parties and take Mcliberal and the rest of the rino’s with you.
And who is that? Bob Barr or the truther?
You confirm it in your own rebuttal.
You don’t have to support his “policies” to support the candidate. Indeed, a commonplace delusion here is that you are adhering to conservatism by rolling over for Obama.
It always has been.
Seeing as it is a flushed vote, yes it is. So who is this “conservative”? Introduce us to the latest pied piper of missfits. Who is the newest “only man who can save America”? Do tell Solo.
No it isn’t, it is a vote to give us a fighting chance. A vote against him is a vote for socialism and surrender.
I am absolutely adhering to my principles. I intend to vote for McCain and hold his feet to the fire as best as I can. If I fail at least I did my best, unlike you filthy cowards who are willing to see the country wrecked because you have been duped.
Is there anything more ironic then some idiot calling someone who is actually going to vote or a republican a RINO when he isn’t? I would tell you to switch parties but it is probably best to keep you in the democrats where you can be stabbing them in the back.
Again Bill, the backstabber is McCain.
I was where you are back in ‘92, saying the same things to Perot voters.
McCain is simply A Liberal Too Far.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 7:51 pm, Virginia Patriot said:
Again, you are wrong. You are rationalizing a craven decision that you can not intellectually support. You have been doing this for months so either you are lying or you are “stuck on stupid”. The back stabbers are the ones willing to see the USA dragged in to the dirt rather then get off their rear ends and work for the most beneficial outcome. The back stabbers are the idiots who think that they are going to reform anything, be it the republican party or the country by trashing it.
Remind me how that worked out, did Perot win? No… It just helped elect Clinton, didn’t it? Guess you were correct back then. You must have been hit in the head with a frying pan or something since then.
How would you know? You are rolling over for Obama. Be a democrat, socialist all you want, just don’t kid yourself that you are doing it out of conservative principles.
Clinton’s election gave us the class of ‘94 and Republican control of the House for the first time in 50 years. They squandered the opportunity with a pork-fest and paid a price in 2006. They misread that election and have gone left instead of right.
McCain could be on auto-pilot cruising to a landslide if he wasn’t stuck on stupid (amnesty).
All liberals want amnesty. They know it will destroy the conservative movement.
So we owe it all to Ross Perot. Look, idiot; Barack Obama is no Bill Clinton. Obama will be an outright disaster for this country and he needs to be stopped during the election because Obama will have both the house and the senate and will be unrestricted by any checks and balances. He will be a hard core leftist given FULL control of the government by people like you.
I can’t believe how fundamentally stupid your argument is. The idea of turning over prower to the the opposition so that they can create a disaster that will get peoples minds right is stupid, underhanded and will not work for the reasons I outlined with “Send_Me”. It is inherently anti-American to want to “teach the country a lesson”, to smack it down to get your own way and it is delusional to think that will work. It could just as easily go the other way with a new LBJ. Come to think of it, LBJ was right of Obama.
It shows a contempt for this country that rivals the contempt that Harry Reid demonstrates. You are willing to see the USA run in to the ground to get another percentage point of power over the rubble. Traitorous. You need to take the “patriot” off your user name.
Who is “they”? You are under the assumption that the RNC is picking and choosing who we should? We had primaries and John McCain got the most votes. There is no “they”. If we have a left of where you want him to be candidate it is because he was voted in by the members of the republican party, not because he was chosen to circumvent conservatism.
The choices are what they are at this point. Obama or McCain. There isn’t a conservative case to be made to elect obama. The one that you are cling on to was thought up by the DNC to get you to make the fool out of yourself that you are making now and help elect the very opposite of what you supposedly advocate.
One more detail, he has an 82% lifetime conservative rating which is 2 points shy of Fred Thompson’s.. darling of the self righteous pseudo-conservatives here.
Once again, Virginia parrot; If this were actually about Amnesty you would have been able to come up with some kind of counterargument to the various reasons that I have outlined that it is essential to elect McCain in order to defeat Amnesty. You haven’t been able to do that yet you pop up with the same worn out canard on the next thread. If this were about Amnesty you might have shown the slightest inclination toward getting involved in the effort to stop it… which you haven’t. If this were about Amnesty you would have given some thought as to how it could be stopped under an Obama presidency. Nothing yet… This isn’t about Amnesty, you are using that as an excuse. This is either about the STUPID idea that you gain influence by losing elections or you are a dnc sock puppet trying to split the weak minded off the hard right of the GOP.
So which is it? Are you “stuck on stupid” or are you a liar?
On September 23rd, 2008 at 9:35 pm, Solo said:
Well since you are effectively helping the open borders candidate I guess that makes you a liberal.
McCain has promised not to push for comprehensive immigration reform until the governors of the border states sign off that the borders are secure. That will give is time to organize and push back. That will give us opportunity to slow it down by preventing the governors from signing, which wont be hard because by signing they will lose millions in federal enforcement dollars. This will give pro enforcement people time to push, delay and insist on a final bill that is strong, gets rid of as many illegals as possible and will ensure that the country doesn’t have to go though the same debate in another 10 years.
Obama has made no such promise and will sign whatever the democratic congress sends him as soon as it hits his desk, probably within the first 100 days when he is looking for some quick legislative “achievements”. Game over. Indeed, you can give up any idea of pushing the country right (for many reasons) because the sudden demographic shift of millions of new democrats will mean that the next republican president after Obama will make John McCain look like Curtis LeMay or Barry Goldwater.
Guess again, Bill.
Thanks for the link but I don’t need it. I’ve been a member of fair & NumbersUSA for well over 3 years now.
So, if I understand Bill’s argument:
P1: A vote for someone besides Obama or McCain is not a vote for Obama or McCain.
P2: McCain is flawed, but closer to conservative values than Obama.
P3: These two candidates are the only candidates with a chance of winning.
P4: A conservative should vote for the more conservative of the two candidates.
P5: McCain is more controllable by conservatives that Obama.
Conclusion: A conservative should vote for McCain.
Fallacy 1 (P2,P4): Saying that McCain is less flawed that Obama is problematic. How bad would McCain have to be before you wouldn’t vote for him any longer? At what point would you abandon the Republican Party for another for the sake of principle? An analogy: if two popular men were up for the job of school superintendant, one a pedophile, the other a serial killer, would you vote for either of them if you were on the school board? I’d assume not, especially if there is a lesser known person who is qualified and doesn’t have the unpleasant baggage of the others. I’d do all I could to get the word out that he’s the guy we need to choose, not the other two.
Fallacy 2 (P3,P4): Saying that McCain and Obama are the only two candidates with a chance of winning is a false dichotomy. If conservatives shook off the chains of the Republican Party and stuck to their own principles, then they wouldn’t be destined to their own self-fulfilling prophecy.
Fallacy 3 (P5): To say that McCain is more controllable than Obama is wishful thinking. Especially with a heavily Democratic Congress, he’ll have no problems passing amnesty, as an example. As President, he’ll do whatever he thinks is right, regardless if it’s popular or not. Apparently, he thinks amnesty is right.
Well, I seem to have found a candidate (if you’re willing to read what he has to say before you dismiss him, like you did with Farah and others did to Voddie Baucham) who espouses the following (not a complete list): (1) Against abortion. (2) Against affirmative action. (3) On campaign finance reform: Only voters (not corporations or groups) should be allowed to contribute to campaigns (however much they wish to spend), which should in turn become public knowledge. (4) Supports the death penalty. (5) Says, “In our foreign policy and international alliances, we must never be subservient to merely pragmatic considerations of money, oil, or any other expediency. We must set our course mindful that we are morally obligated to always stand foursquare with those who fight on the front lines of freedom and representative government…” (6) Opposes embryonic stem cell research. (7) “I have always been a staunch defender of free enterprise and an opponent of the domineering bureaucracies, both national and international, which try to suffocate it. But I cannot stand with those so-called conservatives who believe that “free trade” is more important than free government, or the “fiscal conservatives” who seem to believe that money and economic advantage matter more than our right to constitutional, elective self-determination. Trade socialism must be defeated root and branch, even when it is called ‘free trade.’” (8) Pro-legal immigration. Very much against illegal immigration. (9) Believes the Constitution has supremacy over the SOTUS. (10) 2nd Amendment: “The right to keep and bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights so that when, by a long train of abuses, government evinces a methodical design upon our natural rights, we will have the means to protect and recover those rights.” (11) On education: “I strongly favor school choice approaches that empower parents to take control of their children’s education…” (12) On the GWOT: “’What do you do about the war on terror” is like asking, ‘Do you want to die.’ No we don’t — therefore we must defend ourselves against this threat, and we have no option and no choice.” (13) Experience: U.S. Department of State, foreign service officer, 1978, consular office, Bombay, India, 1979-80, desk officer, Zimbabwe, 1980-81, policy planning staff, 1981-83, U.S. representative to the United Nations Economic and Social Council (UNESCO), 1983-85, assistant secretary of state for International Organization Affairs, 1985-88; Republican nominee for U.S. Senate from Maryland, 1988, 1992; Citizens Against Government Waste, president, 1989-91; public speaker, lecturer, 1990- ; Alabama A&M University, interim president, 1991; WCBM Radio, Owings Mills, MD, host of nationally syndicated “America’s Wake-Up Call” show; candidate for president of the United States, 1995-96.
His name: Alan Keyes.
No thanks. We’re done here.
Might as well save your cash if you are just going to turn around undercut yourself and save your breath if you want anyone with a triple digit IQ to vote to wreck the country in order to save it.
Good. I’m tired of reading left of center gop/McCain talking points.
Yeah, I could be just like you…send the cash, support an open borders, pro-amnesty, reach across the isle backstabbing moderate like Mcglobalwarming. Yeah, that’ll save conservative movement. The kool-aid is strong in you, Bill.
Wreck It? I’m trying to save it from incompetent fools like McCain, Obama, and moderate sheep like you, Forrest.
On September 23rd, 2008 at 11:32 pm, Send_Me said:
Brace yourself. Through the looking glass we go to the land of make-believe. Where tootsie rolls rain from the sky and there are 72 black-eyed virgins for everyone who votes for Alan Keyes!
There are 2 viable candidates and here is a newsflash for you, you moonbat: Alan Keyes isn’t one of them. (Why didn’t you just say that you were stark raving mad to begin with so I could have saved some time typing? Seeing you plop down Alan Keys as your hope for America is like having a conversation with someone who you recently met and half way in the middle of what appears to be a rational construct they say something like: “You know, they can put a man on the moon but they still can’t rescue those poor people on Gilligan’s Island….” )
It isn’t a fallacy. By most any measure McCain has more qualified, better-suited candidate. By a conservative metric or even a common decency metric. Of course he is no Allan Keyes. But who but Allan Keyes is Allan Keyes? (!!!)
How shall I quantify this? 20% as bad as Obama? 22% as good as Alan Keyes? (Can you wrap your head around the fact that he has no chance what so ever of being elected president of the USA?) How shall I rate McCain? On a scale of Obama to Keys he is 86% Keys.
Huh? Did you say something? I am just trying to imagine “president Keyes”. It’s a goddamn punch line. Gee…I wonder what would happen if we were to match up Barack Obama with Allan Keyes? OH WAIT, I DON”T HAVE TO WONDER AT ALL, IT ALREADY HAPPENED! Allan Keyes got spanked like a little she dog by the obamamessiah in the Illinois Senate race. GEE, Let’s carry this fantasy to the impossible point where Alan Keyes gets to take on Barack Obama idiot to idiot… It has already been done and he lost! Not only did he lose, he got his obnoxious butt wooped. So gee… This probably isn’t a good idea to make Alan Keyes our standard bearer, is it? Why? HE ALREADY LOST TO OBAMA.
A stupid one. An insult to decency. McCain is a genuine hero and has almost given his life for the USA. Obama has served nothing but his own personal ambitions and the cause of soft-Marxism. That is the choice.
There is not one tiny thing false about it. This is where you have severed yourself from reality. Oh My God… The chances of Alan Keyes getting elected to dogcatcher much less PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES in 2008 are ZERO. Do you know how many busloads of people would have to go off a cliff before we got to Alan Keyes? Good Lord I STAND MORE OF A CHANCE then Alan Keyes!!!
This is a republic, not a parliamentary democracy. We vote for people, not parties and there were plenty of conservatives in the primaries, including Alan Keyes! (I can’t get over this. You need to have a disclaimer hung around your neck or some kind of warning tattooed on to your forehead.) HE LOST, JUST LIKE HE WOULD DO AGAIN… JUST LIKE HE WILL!!!!
No it isn’t! It is a demonstrable fact! McCain has an 82% lifetime rating by the conservative union and Obama was the most liberal senator in the business according to the national review. It is the fact. It can be shown and measured. (Unlike the possibility of Alan Keyes being elected president!)
Yes he will, he has promised not to sign it until the borders are secured. That will give people (who are sane) time to pressure congress for enforcement. Either way we (people who are sane) are going to have to work to stop it. Obama is the one who will have no problem passing it.
He has reversed himself on a host of issues to please his republican base… He has shown that he listens. Obama has shown that he thinks that you are a bigoted cracker and that there is absolutely no need to work with you or anyone else to compromise his collective vision for how you are going to live. And Alan Keyes? He has shown that he can get the grand total of 2 votes. Probably from promising to mount a rescue operation to Gilligan’s Island…
On September 24th, 2008 at 1:15 am, Solo whined:
Go back to where you will be more at home then.
Fixed it for you. Better yet, you could just say that you were a member…
Another Alan Keyes fellow are you?
You are just helping Obama… but you knew that already, right? Right…
Well, since you didn’t respond to any of Keyes’ positions, and solely resorted to ad hominem fallacies, I guess this conversation is over. If you are a guy who votes based upon principle, as John Adams recommends, then you’d at least read what he has to say. You haven’t responded to logic. You haven’t responded to the historical examples. (Speaking of history, it’d probably serve you well to read about why Keyes lost so badly in IL. Something about the Republican candidate dropping out due to a sex scandal 86 days before the election and the IL state GOP asking Keyes to run when no one else would, even though he wasn’t from IL.) I don’t much look forward to hearing people complain in just a few months time about amnesty getting passed. We all have seen what the “lesser of two evils” is doing for us now with this $700+ billion bailout, which McCain is showing real leadership on, just not the right kind. I guess I’ll seek life someplace besides the GOP from now on. They still have some good ones (Duncan Hunter, Tancredo, Jindal, and a few others), but taken as a whole, they’re lost.
Take it easy, Bill. Thanks for the responses.
Keep chugging the moderate kool-aid.
Smart folks, those Adams’. “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” ~John Quincy Adams
Solo said:
Keep lying to yourself that you are not selling out the country.
WHY BOTHER? The whole POINT is that he is not going to get elected! Can’t you see that? He could be the best candidate in the world (lol) and your choice between viable candidates would still be McCain or Obama.
Look, This is what Allan Keys (lol) has to say about Barack Obama:
So… Don’t you think someone like that ought to be stopped? Since Alan isn’t going to be able to do it shouldn’t you be thinking about voting for someone who can stop him? (A rhetorical question at this point. I don’t think there is anyone who really hasn’t made up their minds already. In so far as conservatism goes, or even the wellbeing of the country I personally have no doubt that you have chosen wrong.)
Indeed, I am due back on earth.
Why don’t you vote for John Adams? Even in his current condition he will probably get more votes then Alan Keyes.
I absolutely have.
Big stupid mouth? Was that it? His big stupid mouth? I seem to recall something about his big stupid mouth having something to do with the crushing defeat he suffered at the hands of Barack Obama… Maybe it was his stupid big mouth..
Then vote against Obama and get to work. Mark my words, the surest way to open borders is to elect Obama. Join us in our effort to stop it, regardless of whether you vote for someone with no chance of effecting the outcome or not.
Is that the lesser of 2 evils or simple mismanagement and greed? I have an MBA and I don’t know whether or not this is necessary or a good idea. Why don’t you ask the Professor and Mr.Howell and tell me what they say is the best course of action.
You aren’t doing yourself or the country any favors.
Count me among the many Republicans here who have enough self respect to stay far away from McCain on election day.
His record is clear and if he should win, the whining from betrayed voters will start immediately after his left-wing inauguration speech. Democrats and independents gave us McCain in the open primaries. Let them elect him.
You don’t have any self respect… If you did you would be working to stop Obama.
Bull.