Posted on 02/02/2008 8:52:25 PM PST by Fargo Rock
Something has been bothering me all week and I'm hoping someone here can make me understand. Since 2001, we've been calling the Democrats a party of surrender, anti-war, anti-troops, etc. McCain has his faults. There's no question about it. But why are people like Ann Coulter, Tammy Bruce, Michelle Malkin and many here ready to hand over control of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the future of the War on Terror, and the care of our troops to Hillary Clinton? That's what will happen if people decide to either stay home or vote for Hillary in some kind of misguided moral protest. Don't our troops deserve better than that? It's throwing them to the wolves.
Come next year, either a Republican or a Democrat will be the President. One party has 0% conservative values. The other has varying degrees of conservative values, depending which candidate, most have at least 50%. Which do you prefer?
Gee, and I thought this was fairly specific, HILLARY v. McCain! I’d vote for anything with a pulse against her. Is that wrong?
You sound like the loony left talking about Bush.
We're electing a president not an emperor. There happens to be 535 elected Representatives and Senators who might have something to say about what happens, whoever is elected to be the next president.
Wrong, the true figure is posted here look it up. I don't know of any conservative positions that he has really done anything but give lip service.
The man actually tried to run as VP with john "I was in Nam" Kerry. And I'm not emotional at all. I just call'em as I see'em.....
If John McCain is the nominee, I will stay home. My husband, on the other hand, will actually vote for Hillary.
I rest my case.
Honestly, I think some conservatives suffer from CDS (Clinton Derangement Syndrome); while I cannot now or ever support Hillary, when it comes to protecting us from terrorists I really have no doubt that she would do a fine job. I know that may be blasphemy to some, but it’s the truth. Look at Clinton 1, he was definitely an interventionist. In all probability, if Hillary does indeed become the president, Mdm. Albright will become secretary of state for a second time and will be the chief architect of our foreign policy. Has anyone ever even listened to what the woman has to say? She’s plenty hawkish enough to satisfy me. I know at the moment Hillary is pandering to the anti-war nutters in her party to get elected, but the moment she becomes president she’ll drop them by the wayside and assume a reasonable foreign policy.
Does that mean I’ll support Hillary? Absolutely not! Let me state unequivocally that if McCain is the nominee I’ll dutiful go down to my local polling station and pull that ‘R’ lever - even if I have to get liquored-up beforehand to go through with it. I’ll vote for him because the next president will likely appoint 2-3 new supreme court justices, and there’s a likelihood of getting the right kind of judge in there with McCain, whereas with Hillary there is no chance. But as far as terrorism is concerned, I am perfectly happy with any of the candidates save Obama.
Ya know what? They would. What better excuse to seize absolute power?
I’m afraid a McCain nomination will make many conservatives stay home, regardless of Hillary as the opponent.
“Why do you expect Freepers to toe the Republican line when it isn’t a republican website?”
It has nothing to do with being a Republican. I never said it did. And it has nothing to do with toeing that party line either. What I’m talking about specifically is the war on terror and which candidate would be the better choice to lead it. I don’t think that Clinton or Obama would be the kind of hawk that we need with active wars on two fronts and possibly another looming with Iran. I’m not suggesting that people vote for McCain because he has the R after his name. I’m asking if it’s worth sacrificing control of the war to make a point about immigration or McCain/Feingold, as people like Malkin and Bruce have suggested.
Does that answer your question? I’m not asking that in sarcasm. I just want to make sure that you understand where I’m coming from.
“We’re electing a president not an emperor. There happens to be 535 elected Representatives and Senators who might have something to say about what happens, whoever is elected to be the next president.”
An excellent point, oh, wait, if Hillary wins she’ll likely have a cloture proof Democrat Senate and large majorities in the house. Nice thinking.
Of course if McCain wins there’s just a chance some CONSERVATIVES will ride his coat tails to victory. The next Reagan may be in that freshman class.
Only God is in control. Always has been, always will. It is He who raises up one and puts down another for His purpose. (Psalm 75:6-8) If Hillary is chosen by Him, I do not fear for I trust in Him and He has never let me down. We will have exactly what and who we deserve to lead this country, and he/she will be placed there by God Himself. It will be for His purpose alone.
This nation will not fall unless God wills it. The question we must ask ourselves is, "Are we giving God reason to will it?" The answer is, "If God does not judge America, then He must apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."
Clinton - with strong GOP and conservative opposition in congress - won't immediately cut and run. It would look way too bad, and they wanted that plastered on Bush and the GOP. In 4 years, we will get another shot. Hopefully, we will get a real conservative in.
My biggest problem is that the two left-wingnut Supreme court old as the hill justices are past due to step aside. I hate the thought of McCain, Hillary or BHO appointed their replacements.
We are back to the old game of just voting for someone because he is the party’s man. The sad thing...is that neither candidate is going to satisfy us.
If there ever were a 3rd party run...that would have success over all fifty states...this is the race. I think more than enough of us would give up on both Hillary and McCain...and vote 3rd party just to make a statement.
The idea...that after five primary efforts in the US...the majority of potential candidates for either party are gone...is the biggest joke of the year...and reason enough to change the entire primary season. It might serve the nation alot more...if you had all of the primarys in a five day period in Feb...giving a breathe of fresh air to potential candidates in winning.
Yes sir!
Blaphemy is mild...ever hear of Laurie Mylroie?
You don’t have a case to rest.
Write-in Jefferson, Washington, Reagan or some other historic giant. We can spend the summer determining who it will be. I won’t vote for the angry Senator.
All that kissing rump and then say you don’t like McCain. Why don’t you try voting as you wish and try not belittling people that disagree.
I’m just speaking to what I saw here in 99-2000. The hatred here for W went as far or further than the hatred for McCain right now, yet by voting day 90% of Free Republic had come around.
As for a conservative VP, I’m not going to pretend to know one way or another what kind McCain will pick, but I’ve got to believe that the party isn’t so foolish as to let him pick someone like Lindsay Graham.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.