The Case For a Single McCain Term

Townhall.com ^ | February 17, 2008 | David R. Stokes

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

HELLO!?

Are you unaware of McCain/Lieberman? A new bill introduced to raise taxes, and increase fuel prices by 50 cents per gal., in order to stop Global warming?

McCain’s response to Conservatives who asked him why was; “Well, even if the science on Global Warming is wrong, having a cleaner planet for our kids is not a bad thing.”

Educate yourself, it will help our cause to no end.

[Ryman]

McCain’s ‘Gang of 14’ will take him down to defeat!

[shadowgovernment]

“Is honorable.
Will keep his promises.
Will put the needs of others ahead of his own self-interest.
McCain has demonstrated repeatedly through his political career that he possesses none of those attributes.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..........
When he loses this election I predict he will quit the GOP and Join the Dems..giving the reason that the right wing of the GOP stabbed him in the back and kept him from winning.. and the Dems will give him Chairmanship of any committee he wants - the soros fix is in -you saw it here first folks.

[cripplecreek]

The problem with a single McCain term is the fact that the GOP will do everything they can to discourage another republican from running against a sitting GOP president.

I’ve been watching the numbers and I’m thinking it’s a moot point. Better to look at removing the democrat after 4 years.

[Digital Sniper]

When he loses this election I predict he will quit the GOP and Join the Dems..giving the reason that the right wing of the GOP stabbed him in the back and kept him from winning.

I don't doubt your prediction in the least. McCain darn near switched parties in 2001 (oh, how much trouble he would have saved us if he only had!). Add to that the fact that every piece of legislation he's been a party to since his stinging defeat in 2000 has been a backlash against the Republican Party and its conservative base.

[exhaustedmomma]

McCain is no Teddy Roosevelt. McCain is the Ace of Spades.

[tioga]

God help us if ANY of them get the job.

[kjo]

Now that he’s the nominee, expect the MSM to start puching this.

[Solitar]

Don't even call me liberal!
I'm more of a Goldwater conservative.

After several years of mismanaged foreign policy and wars and perceived domestic screw-ups the incumbent party normally wouldn't stand a chance at getting another of their candidates elected. A "moderate" McCain may be all we can hope for in order to win at least another four years -- then go from there to a "real conservative" or at least somebody who will take care of our defense. We could nominate a "real conservative" or hawk and then lose to the Democrats. Or we could refuse to vote for McCain and end up with Obama or Clinton.

McCain may be bad, but Obama or Clinton will be disaster, but maybe disaster is what some here are hoping for -- so that a Republican on a white horse can ride to the rescue in 4 years. Admittedly I sometimes think that way too, but then I remember that Democrats have too often stayed in for 8 or 12 or years of disaster. After twelve years of Democrat screw-ups we may not have much of an America left to salvage.

[Digital Sniper]

You have no room to be indignant after saying I'm a Clinton/Obama supporter. Forgive my saying so, but no true conservative supports a liberal just because he has an 'R' by his name.

So, once again, if you want to assuage your guilty conscience for supporting a RINO, do it on your own time and stop wasting mine.

[Solitar]

"You have no room to be indignant after saying I'm a Clinton/Obama supporter"

In your short four weeks of being on this forum maybe you have not had a chance to know that not only have I never been a "Clinton/Obama supporter" but I have repeatedly for years warned of disaster of elected another Democrat like Clinton!

Maybe you should think seriously about just how much more damage eight years of Clinton or Obama could do to America than what four years of McCain will do. Even a McCain win is too close to call. We should be focusing on a winning at least four years and maybe more with a good VP.

[CapnJack]

"but Obama or Clinton will be disaster, but maybe disaster is what some here are hoping for -- so that a Republican on a white horse can ride to the rescue in 4 years. Admittedly I sometimes think that way too, but then I remember that Democrats have too often stayed in for 8 or 12 or years of disaster. After twelve years of Democrat screw-ups we may not have much of an America left to salvage." It may not be a Repub. on a white horse in 4 or 8 years ... it could be a million or so armed Americans who have had enough. Taking the 1st stanza of the 2nd Amendment to heart, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state ....". At least one can only hope if things become so bad under a Liberal Reich.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

One of three people will be in that job:

Barack “Che” Obama
Hillary “Loathe the Military” Clinton

or John McCain.

Please choose wisely.

O.K....

I choose "Bullwinkle."

[kjo]

Agreed. Bullwinkle is as good a choice as any of the three candidates left.

[Solitar]

It may not be a Repub. on a white horse in 4 or 8 years ... it could be a million or so armed Americans who have had enough.

I'm prepared for that too. But voting for McCain and a decently conservative VP is a helluva lot cheaper in blood and guts than having to resort to an armed revolution of AR15s against helicopter gunships and Abrams tanks (as in Janet Reno and Wesley Clark).

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

In addition to Teddy Roosevelt,...

Teddy Roosevelt charged San Juan Hill.

San Juan McCain is no Teddy Roosevelt.

[nuconvert]

Kind of a ridiculous piece. He’s a 1-term pres. by virtue of his age alone.

[Solitar]

BTW,
After eight years of Obama or Clinton we may not have enough "assault rifles" or enough ammo for the assault rifles we have (cuz they can dry up the ammo supply easily enough). The option of breaking into military bases for ammo may not result in much if they too don't have much ammo or working weapons.

Hmmm....
Maybe a million Americans could defend themselves against an Obama or Clinton-decimated military. Then again, maybe our foreign enemies would take advantage of that decimation. So we would be short on equipment and ammo against nuclear Jihad.

Again I'd rather opt for voting against a Clinton/Obama disaster rather than the last million Americans having to resort to armed revolution or defense against nuclear Jihad.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Agreed. McCain will never see eighty. Maybe even seventy-five will be a push. He’s not a well man.

You have a very valid point. It is very possible that the person JM selects as VP could eventually become president. Let's hope it's someone we like. I will be voting for JM, even though I have no respect for him. I do believe he will do right by the troops.

[Tribune7]

You have no room to be indignant after saying I'm a Clinton/Obama supporter.

Well, what are you doing to try to keep one of them from becoming president?