Sitting this one out (open letter to RNC)

me | 8/21/04 | me

[wdkeller]

TO: Republican National Committee Cc: Butler Co. Republican party Ohio Republican Party George W. Bush

Subject: Sitting this one out

As a conservative, I have become increasingly disappointed at the leftward drift of the Republican Party under the leadership of George W. Bush. His monetary and immigration policies are prime examples.

I have come to the conclusion that he is, quite simply, unacceptable. Furthermore, the overall position of the Republican Party is too far to the left to suit me.

The argument that "the other guy is worse" is invalid. There is now such an indiscernible difference between the Republican and Democrat parties that it would make little difference who won the election.

You have not put up a good candidate since Ronald Reagan. I have held my nose and voted in the last three elections, but I can't stomach it any more.

Therefore, this year, I will vote for no Republican candidates at the national, state or local level. If I find an acceptable conservative 3rd party, I will vote for them.

If we lose the election, so be it. My prayer is that a sound drubbing will slap some sense back into the Republican Party.

- Wayne Keller Cincinnati, Ohio

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

It does not require a high IQ to cross out someone elses opinion simply because it does not agree with yours.

1.) No... but it does require an I.Q. substantially loftier than your own (demonstrably) to use simple words such as "censor" correctly; which you are, plainly, incapable of doing.

2.) Straw man argument. No one here "crossed out words" words simply because "they didn't agree with them." They were crossed out because they were harebrained, both in selection and arrangement; the argument they attempted to advance was, likewise, imbecillic; and the lackwit responsible for same was, therefore (and reamains), either a troll... a patsy... or (most likely) both.

And the jackasses trotting along after him, addlepatedly braying their little donkey "Hallelujahs!" and guzzling any/all pro-Islamic Kool-Aid in sight are scarcely in any position, manifestly. to question the intelligence of their online betters. Which is pretty much anyone with the normal compliment of chromosomes, when you get right down to it.

Back to your mosque, you.

[Darlin']

Wow. The light of your purity must be positively blinding when you look in the mirror. </ mega-sarcasm>

[bert]

Quitters always lose.

[eskimo]

LOL! Considering your self professed inability to achieve that state...I guess that would be encouragement...or jealously? It's always so difficult to tell these things when dealing with "special" people

I think you are special too; guess that's why I decided to exchange juvenile barbs with you for as long as I did. Don't get used to it though; my tolerance for this sort of trivial nonsense is usually quite low.

[CWOJackson]

"...my tolerance for this sort of trivial nonsense is usually quite low."

LOL! Suddenly you're trying to deny your years of devotion to pat buchanan? I don't think so.

[ohioWfan]

LOL!

[carenot]

13. Prohibited putting U.S. troops under U.N. command.

What about Michael New?

[ohioWfan]

Thanks for that sage advice, oh frozen one.

I'll keep that in mind before I post again.............all the while ignoring the fact that President Bush has the highest percentage of support from his base of any President in history........

Cause you see, that's what I'd have to do if I actually believed what you said.

[sweetliberty]

[CWOJackson]

Now you can start to appreciate how buchanan was able to turn double digit poll numbers and $12+ million dollars into one of the greatest campaign disasters in American history.

By the time he was finished driving off his supporters in disgust, ALL he was left with were people like "that". Eski-moo has one ability and one only...attempting to trash the President. If only all the President's enemies were are skilled.

[FreeReign]

To believe in a future for America, you have to believe that (in the long run) the People can choose wisely. Politicians from Bush to your dogcatcher are professionals at figuring out what the People want (as was Ronald Reagan). The reason there is not a strong Constitutionalist party is because the People don't want (won't support) it. Hold your nose and vote for Bush, because after Kerry gets elected (actually, it's going to be Hillary) you won't be doing much voting.

Your post says it all.

I'll just add that in the 2000 election, a majority of the people voted for either Gore or Nader. And yet there are people on this thread who wonder why Bush is a status quo spender(relative to GDP).

[eskimo]

2.) Straw man argument. No one here "crossed out words" words simply because "they didn't agree with them." They were crossed out because they were harebrained,...

It's obvious you believe your opinion is the only correct one.

And the jackasses trotting along after him, addlepatedly braying their little donkey "Hallelujahs!" and guzzling any/all pro-Islamic Kool-Aid in sight are scarcely in any position, manifestly. to question the intelligence of their online betters. Which is pretty much anyone with the normal compliment of chromosomes, when you get right down to it.

LOL, "online betters". Only in your little fantasy world.

Back to your mosque, you.

Hey, that's it, everyone who disagrees with you is a raghead. Life is simple.

[YOUGOTIT]

And will you be the same when you get your berka issued after the traitor Kerry takes over?

[Joe Hadenuf]

What we are witnessing here is the predictable fragmentation of a political party. I agree with others. President Bush is clearly not the conservative that so many hoped he would be. In reality, he turned out to be just another politico bending and pandering to those that never had conservative principals to begin with.

The folks here voicing decent, are justified in doing so. As I and others watch them being attacked and called names, it's painfully clear that they are only speaking the truth, and voicing what many of us have felt for a long time. Watching others trying their best to discredit them regardless of the obvious truth, is equally disturbing.

[FreeReign]

Thanks to Bush and the all-out GOP push to defeat a conservative, Arlen Specter will chair the judiciary committee. He will not allow a conservative out of committee. So the Bushies will pretend they WANT a conservative, but have to be "realistic" and put up some squish.

Arlen Specter was one of the biggest defenders of Clarence Thomas. That's Arlen's track record on the judiciary.

BTW, the people of Pennsylvania had every chance to pick a more conservative candidate against Specter in the R primary and low and behold -- they didn't!

[itsamelman]

I wish I could claim credit...

... and there is a thread here.

[Bigun]

Thanks! I guess I missed it earlier.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

You really do need to learn the necessary writer's craft of compression. You take entirely too long in dithering your way towards your increasingly knock-kneed "points," such as they are; and it simply doesn't do you any favors, quite frankly.

As an example, I have taken the liberty of condensing your entire "argument," to date, down to its essence:

You're welcome, of course.

[carenot]

I agree.

[eskimo]

The folks here voicing decent, are justified in doing so. As I and others watch them being attacked and called names, it's painfully clear that they are only speaking the truth, and voicing what many of us have felt for a long time. Watching others trying their best to discredit them regardless of the obvious truth, is equally disturbing.

The mindless political automatons are well over-represented here. My only hope is that this is not true for the whole of America.