Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is it time for conservatives to support McCain?
Intellectual Conservative ^ | Feb. 25, 2008 | Rachel Alexander

Posted on 02/25/2008 9:55:55 PM PST by FocusNexus

Unless one of Huckabee's miracles happens, McCain will be the Republican nominee for president. As other presidential candidates have dropped out, some conservatives, such as Senator and former presidential candidate Sam Brownback from Kansas and Jonah Goldberg from National Review have decided to support him. But many conservative Republicans including Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and James Dobson have continued to hold out on supporting him, and may continue to do so right up until the general election.

For those conservatives who have refrained from supporting McCain because he has too many negatives, they must decide whether those negatives outweigh the negatives of having a Democrat in office.

Even so, the most important issue facing the U.S. today is terrorism. McCain has promised to be tough on terrorism and keep our troops in Iraq until we're assured of stability. The thought of Barack Obama handling our approach to terrorism should send chills down anyone's spine. Hillary Clinton wouldn't be much better, because her motive on the war on terror is to score a legacy for herself.

(Excerpt) Read more at intellectualconservative.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: conservatives; elections; mccain; rino; whino
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-122 next last
To: Names Ash Housewares

I say we try to get rid of McCain and get a conservative governor like Haley Barbour. We can change this convention.


51 posted on 02/25/2008 10:33:17 PM PST by nygoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
I'm sure you'll be so pleased and inspired as many of us were here in CA after all the Schwartzenswindler rhetoric at the 2004 Republican CONvention, only to see him steering our ship of state into a generation of bondage and foolishness!!! Now he endorses your pathetic hero... enjoy, but include me OUT!!!

You are so right. I remember the same fear-mongering, arm-twisting at a state level when Schwarzenegger, the "moderate" ran against Phil Angelides, the liberal.

I'm sure Angelides would have been a terrible governor, but the real difference between Angelides and Schwarzenerrer is ...er, wait, there is no real difference.

52 posted on 02/25/2008 10:35:51 PM PST by The Citizen Soldier ("There is only one reason to be a Christian: because it's true" Francis Schaeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

McCain has nothing to offer conservatives, and he hasn’t even tried. We’re waiting for McCain to ask us personally, as a group that it and make some demonstration of good faith. I don’t see that happening. McCain doesn’t want conservatives to support him.


53 posted on 02/25/2008 10:36:37 PM PST by Eva (Benedict Arnold was a war hero, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

And what do you think he should tell us?


54 posted on 02/25/2008 10:36:50 PM PST by Lily4Jesus ( Jesus Saves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

BURN THE “BIG TENT” DOWN.

No more Bakerites.

No more RINOS, not a single, solitary one.

ONLY REAGAN CONSERVATIVES NEED APPLY.


55 posted on 02/25/2008 10:40:25 PM PST by roamer_1 (Conservative always, Republican no more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eva
McCain has nothing to offer conservatives, and he hasn’t even tried.

As usual Eva, you are right on.

This thread askes the wrong question. It should be, "Is It Time for McCain to Support Conservatives?"

56 posted on 02/25/2008 10:47:13 PM PST by The Citizen Soldier (If I have to vote for a maverick, I'll write in James Garner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

Exactly, Texas Eagle!

Here are the points I posted at Intellectual Con for conservatives to back him:

1) He calls a press conference NOW and states that as President, ANY kind of amnesty or legalization of the millions of illegals here “is DOA”.

2) He makes Romney his VP WITH THE UNDERSTANDING that he, McCain, is A ONE-TERM PRESIDENT, ONLY!

3) He will build the double fence in 6 months and if necessary, put troops on the Border which is totally out of hand.

4) He will INCREASE ICE raids and INCREASE the number of agents at DHS.

5) He will shut down SPP and guarantee that under his presidency, there will be NO move towards the NAU/Amero.

First, he needs to select Romney as VP. That would be a huge first step. Saying that “Amnesty is DOA” would help, but he needs to back it up with other statements.


57 posted on 02/25/2008 10:47:37 PM PST by levotb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: unspun

HUckabee is a socialist — he just happens to be religious, but he is callous enough to use his religion for political purposes and to further his own ego — not very Christian like behavior.


58 posted on 02/25/2008 10:49:03 PM PST by FocusNexus ("Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: The Citizen Soldier

askes=asks


59 posted on 02/25/2008 10:50:08 PM PST by The Citizen Soldier (If I have to vote for a maverick, I'll write in James Garner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1

“No more Bakerites.”

That’s a laugh, since Baker was the one who pushed Fred Thompson and conservatives fell for it hook, line, and sinker — result: McCain the Republican nominee.

I hope all Fred supporters are very happy now, having contributed to McCain’s winning the Republican nomination.

The least you can do now, is to support McCain against Obama.


60 posted on 02/25/2008 10:54:49 PM PST by FocusNexus ("Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus
That’s a laugh, since Baker was the one who pushed Fred Thompson and conservatives fell for it hook, line, and sinker — result: McCain the Republican nominee.

I know.

The least you can do now, is to support McCain against Obama.

No. McCian is a traitorous bastard. He is without honor. He is unworthy.

61 posted on 02/25/2008 10:58:15 PM PST by roamer_1 (Conservative always, Republican no more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

Find me where Hilda-bama says anything like this...

“I will fight every moment of every day in this campaign to make sure that Americans are not deceived by the eloquent but empty calls for change that promises no more than a holiday from history and a return to the false promises and failed policies of a tired philosophy that trusts in government more than people.”

Or comes even close to McCain in supporting our troops and the war against islamo facism.

McCain has his problems to sey the least, but compared to what the democrats will do?

My God.

I’ll take McCain over them anyday.

Anyone who doesn’t, hasn’t looked the liberal beast in the eye yet in my opinion.


62 posted on 02/25/2008 10:59:51 PM PST by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lily4Jesus

Congressman Mike Pence has proposed a Contract with Conservatives which John McCain must sign off on to get our support. The elections of 2006 showed what can happen when Republican officeholders do not follow through on core Republican principles. Turnout goes down, and Republicans lose. The trend is looking even worse for 2008. As former House Speaker Newt Gingrich noted in a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC):

“[On Super Tuesday], there were 14.6 million Democrats who thought the presidential nomination was worth voting for, and there were 8.3 million Republicans on Super Tuesday,” Gingrich said. “That is a warning of a catastrophic election.”

Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) noted in his CPAC speech that candidates must return to conservative principles if they hope to win. He pointed out several areas where Republican officials must return to their roots... to the principles that led to the Republican Revolution. In particular, Pence points to areas such as life, free speech, smaller government, and spending.

America can thrive under conservative leadership and government. The Republican Party is best equipped to deliver this kind of leadership, but too often, it has not. The time has come when conservative voters can no longer be taken for granted. For our time, effort, money, and votes, we need a pledge. We need a pledge from our presidential nominee to uphold the core Republican values that built this party, and which have taken a backseat to politics in recent years.

The Contract with Conservatives is that pledge. It is a pledge to uphold the major conservative ideals that have been pushed aside over the past decade.

Contract with Conservatives:

Immigration Reform:

Secure America’s borders.

Enforce employment laws.

No amnesty.

The American people have spoken, and the clear message is that immigration reform starts with secure borders. In a post-9/11 world, we should expect nothing less. In addition, the American people do not support amnesty. Candidates must repudiate amnesty and show respect for the American people by showing respect for the law. Illegal aliens should not be given special consideration for citizenship and should not be put ahead of those seeking to come to America legally. Conservatives will work for candidates who pledge to put border security first and who pledge to not put illegal aliens ahead of those seeking citizenship through legal means.

Tax Reform:

Make President Bush’s tax cuts permanent.

Reduce taxes, both on business and individuals.

Simplify the tax code by moving to a flat tax or the Fair Tax.

No favorites — All tax cuts should be across the board The tax code must be simplified, and all taxes should be reduced. The tax code should focus on its core function — a means of raising revenue. The tax code should not be a vehicle for social engineering, and the reduction of taxes should not pit one socio-economic group against another. Conservatives will support candidates who pledge to cut taxes and simplify the tax code, while not engaging in class warfare.

Size and Scope of Federal Government:

Reduce the size of the federal government.

Reform entitlement programs.

Respect states’ rights and limit the reach of the federal government as stated in the Constitution.

Cut spending.

Support a balanced budget amendment.

Eliminate earmarks and support stand-alone spending bills.

It is not enough for the federal government to only grow by a few percentage points. In the end, it still leads to bigger government. The federal government must SHRINK. The Republican Revolution was built on this core Republican principle, and conservatives will support candidates committed to shrinking the size and scope of the federal government. The pork must go! Earmarks and pork-barrel spending must be eliminated. These practices lead to corruption and are not conservative. The federal government should do only those core jobs enumerated in the Constitution. Other governmental responsibilities should fall to the states. Conservatives will support candidates who pledge to cut spending, shrink government, and eliminate earmarks.

Judges:

Vigorously nominate and support the confirmation of judges who follow the law, not those who legislate from the bench.

Wage a real fight against left-wing attempts to block judicial nominees.

Nominating a conservative judge simply to let him or her languish without an up-or-down vote is not acceptable. Judicial nominees, who follow the law rather than make new laws from the bench, deserve full and enthusiastic support. Conservatives will support candidates who pledge to nominate strict constructionists and who will not wilt in that support even under left-wing attacks.

Life:

Respect the rights of the unborn and promote laws which will protect innocent human life.

Support the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Block any efforts to fund or promote embryonic stem cell research.

Conservatives believe in a culture of life. This culture must be embraced and advocated by our Republican leaders. Conservatives will support candidates who pledge to promote a culture of life and who work for the overturning of Roe v. Wade. No candidate can say they are “100% pro-life” and also support embryonic stem cell research. This research results in the destruction of innocent human life. Research proves that adult stem cells are as good or better for curing diseases, and thus the use of embryonic stem cells is moot. Conservatives will support candidates who pledge to support life at every stage.

Free Speech:

Repeal the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act.

Embrace First Amendment rights.

The Campaign Finance Reform Act is an assault on free speech and must be repealed. The law resulted in a rise in soft money advocacy through the actions of 527 organizations while other groups were not allowed to exercise their First Amendment rights to support a candidate of their choice. This is wrong. Conservatives will support candidates who pledge to repeal this law and support the free speech rights of all Americans. I want Republicans to win. Why? The reason is simple. I want conservative ideals to be promoted and implemented into government. Winning for the sake of winning is not even a hollow victory. It is nothing. Conservatives are told to be loyal to the Republican Party, yet the Republican Party has shown no loyalty to the conservative base. Conservatives are told to fall in line and work for Republican candidates, yet Republican candidates are not working for conservatives.

This year, my support comes with a very large string attached. I want my presidential nominee to pledge to support the Contract with Conservatives. If he does, then I will work for the nominee and encourage others to do so. But we must know that our hard work will be something. Lower taxes, smaller government, a commitment to life, support for free speech.... these are timeless issues, and Republicans should be leading the charge.

That is the recipe, not only for victory in November, but for a new Republican Revolution.


63 posted on 02/25/2008 11:00:04 PM PST by jonrick46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus
Is it time for conservatives to support McCain?

I don't know, is he conservative yet?

64 posted on 02/25/2008 11:00:54 PM PST by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Names Ash Housewares
?In 52 seconds, you will be convinced......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl32Y7wDVDs

When nukes are outlawed, only outlaws will have nukes.

Obama knows exactly what he is doing. His aim is to weaken America to the breaking point, all the while couching his plan in the rhetoric of touchy-feely sentiments of hope, peace, love, soul-fixing, change. The leftists are his useful idjits.

65 posted on 02/25/2008 11:00:56 PM PST by informavoracious ("Help me, Obama-Wan Kenyabi, you're my only hope!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

ABM


66 posted on 02/25/2008 11:01:48 PM PST by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
Even if 63% is correct, if the freakin? Republican nominee (likely) only gets 63% of FReepers, he?s got a problem.

I don't know that that's true. If the problem is that he's viewed as insufficiently conservative, that would probably be more of a problem with Freepers than among Republicans at large. There are a lot of RINO voters just like there are a lot of RINO politicians.

67 posted on 02/25/2008 11:06:58 PM PST by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

“ABM”

I was in the “ABM or ABH” group, when there were other viable options.

But now the choice is McCain or Obama, NOT McCain vs. a “mythical perfect conservative who can also win in November”.

There were some 10 Republican candidates in the primary, it’s the fault of the conservatives that they couldn’t coalesce behind a viable candidate and gave the nomination to McCain, by splitting their votes — the least you can do now is to at least not go and give the presidency to Obama because you want to sulk.


68 posted on 02/25/2008 11:07:58 PM PST by FocusNexus ("Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

ABM


69 posted on 02/25/2008 11:10:20 PM PST by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus
Not quite yet. Hell is still quite warm as of the last report.

But I’m sure there’s a chance of freezing rain and black ice any time now...

70 posted on 02/25/2008 11:13:52 PM PST by Dr.Zoidberg (Mohammedanism - Bringing you only the best of the 6th century for fourteen hundred years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

When considering support for McCain, it becomes necessary to consider his retraction of a statement today, and wonder what other statements he might retract once in the White House. See post: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1976307/posts?page=1#1


71 posted on 02/25/2008 11:14:00 PM PST by backtothestreets (My bologna has a first name, it's J-O-R-G-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus
...least you can do now is to at least not go and give the presidency to Obama because you want to sulk.

It's that kind of mischaracterization of our rejection of mcloon that makes me shake my head each time one of you party people cares to spout it, which is quite often these days it seems. You can't help but be insulting because we aren't willing to swallow the same tripe you've been serving for weeks now.

Believe what you will, I'm not sulking, I'm not pouting, I'm not not voting for john "foaming at the mouth" mcloon.

If I wanted someone who would sell us conservatives down the river to work with the democrats, I'd vote for hillary.
72 posted on 02/25/2008 11:23:18 PM PST by Dr.Zoidberg (Mohammedanism - Bringing you only the best of the 6th century for fourteen hundred years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: All
I have to make a second post to this thread.

The question this thread poses is if it is time conservatives perform for McCain. What it deftly overlooks is that McCain is a top ranking US Senator and could be introducing and pushing legislation right now that would win him conservative support. The burden of proof should be on McCain, not conservatives.

73 posted on 02/25/2008 11:24:53 PM PST by backtothestreets (My bologna has a first name, it's J-O-R-G-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

I will NEVER vote for John McCain.


74 posted on 02/25/2008 11:38:22 PM PST by Tzimisce (How Would Mohammed Vote? Hillary for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tzimisce

“I will NEVER vote for John McCain.”

Obama is pleased.


75 posted on 02/25/2008 11:53:50 PM PST by FocusNexus ("Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1
Ah, I see you haven't learned (one of) the lessons of history.

No argument from me that McQueeg is unworthy. I agree completely. ''Traitorous'', though, is a term defined specifically by the Constitution, and McQueeg does not rise (or sink, if you prefer) to the Constitutional standard.

One always should vote for a pompous fool (that would be McQueeg, in this instance) rather than vote for a self-styled ''idealist'' or an apodeictic crook. This principle was demonstrated very clearly in 1972, the fool McGovern vs. the outright crook Nixon. Back then, the electorate were wise enough to recognise this principle. These days, this is a rather less certain proposition.

As regards Osamabama's ''altruism'', well, that's just a plain old crock. He is and has been a state socialist yuppie for all his adult life, an apparent but not actual contradiction in terms, in which subspecies of humanity altruism, in any reasonable sense of the term, simply does not exist. The Australians phrase Osamabama's attitude very elegantly, btw, to wit: ''I'm all right, Jack.''

As regards his advocacy, shoddy that it is, of altruism on everyone else's part (certainly not his), as well as his general intellectual fatuousness, may I refer you to Bertram Scudder, one of Ayn Rand's more memorable characters.

As an exercise, would you just humour me to the extent of putting up, say, part four of the Communist Manifesto side-by-side with Osamabama's most recent policy speech>?

If you can't see, aside from linguistic and stylistic differences over time, that they are effectively identical, then may a gracious G-d bless you, and may that G-d preserve, you and your ilk notwithstanding, what's left of our republic despite you.

76 posted on 02/25/2008 11:55:31 PM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

Not a chance.

I’m hoping that Obama will end the Clintons once and for all.
It’s a damn shame it couldn’t be done by a Republican.


77 posted on 02/26/2008 12:00:27 AM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SAJ
No argument from me that McQueeg is unworthy. I agree completely. ''Traitorous'', though, is a term defined specifically by the Constitution, and McQueeg does not rise (or sink, if you prefer) to the Constitutional standard.

Treasonous is the word you are looking for. One can be traitorous on many levels (and he is).

One who betrays is without honor, and I will have none of him, regardless of any other thing. Good character comes foremost, and he has none.

78 posted on 02/26/2008 12:05:30 AM PST by roamer_1 (Conservative always, Republican no more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1
Fair enough. The question is: will you assist, even en passant as it were, in turning over what's left of the Republic to an absolutely clear-cut Marxist?

If that's your choice, so be it. I voted for McGovern in 1972, on the simple grounds that he would do far less damage to the Republic than the criminal Nixon. I shall vote for McQueeg this time (and I have disparaged this sorry clown on this board many times) on the very same grounds.

McQueeg is dangerous, disingenous, likely corrupt, and a pompous fool. Osamabama is a thoroughgoing Marxist.

There is no choice here, I'm very sorry to say, but to vote McQueeg.

79 posted on 02/26/2008 12:11:17 AM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

Nope...I will never vote for John McCain.

He doesn’t support the 1st Amendment. He believes that government has the right, and the duty, to censor groups like the NRA and Right to Life from running ads that criticize politicians 60 days before an election.

That is downright evil. 50 years ago a man suggesting the government should censor groups that try and criticize politicians would have been run out of town on a rail.

If he’s elected he will push for greater and greater censorship of viewpoints he doesn’t like, just as Putin is doing now in Russia, and I will not EVER vote for such an evil man, even if it brings us Hitlery or Obama.

At least the GOP (what is left of it...which won’t be much after 20 million immigrated Mexicans are added to the Democratic party rolls) will fight further censorship attempts tooth and nail if Hitlery gets in, whereas with John McCain suggesting increased censorship of political viewpoints the GOP will either weakly applaud or remain silent.

It’ll be Scwarzenneger’s California barren GOP wasteland writ large, on a national scale.

I will never, ever, ever, vote for anyone who supports demolishing the 1st Amendment!

Ed


80 posted on 02/26/2008 12:14:41 AM PST by Sir_Ed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SAJ
Fair enough. The question is: will you assist, even en passant as it were, in turning over what's left of the Republic to an absolutely clear-cut Marxist?

In the first place, One cannot trust a betrayer to be true to a single thing, not to mention the toilsome and difficult work ahead. Of it's nature, the office requires a man of uncommon character and obedience to God Almighty. One who betrays cannot qualify at all. This trumps any other argument- He is not trustworthy, and his oath is no good.

As to the Marxist bit, forgive me, but now you are merely arguing over brand names and degrees- Republican Globalism is just Socialism in a business suit.

81 posted on 02/26/2008 12:24:07 AM PST by roamer_1 (Conservative always, Republican no more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

This would be the headline and story if Guiliani had been chosen. This would be the headline and story if Bloomberg had been chosen. This would be the headline and story if Chuck Hagel would have been chosen. When does it stop? How about Ted Kennedy change to Republican in 2012 would we have this headline?????


82 posted on 02/26/2008 12:25:26 AM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1
Have it your own way, m'friend. No quarrel here.

Stipulated that McQueeg is untrustworthy. No quarrel there, either.

I should still MUCH prefer an untrustworthy RINO to an outright Marxist.

I suppose we shall have to agree to disagree.

FReegards to you!

83 posted on 02/26/2008 12:34:30 AM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: SAJ
FReegards to you!

Likewise, FRiend.

84 posted on 02/26/2008 12:36:30 AM PST by roamer_1 (Conservative always, Republican no more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus
No thanks.

Next question.

85 posted on 02/26/2008 12:42:29 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo (Sean, Rush, Laura, Mark, Michelle, Neil, Michael nor others do ANY thinking for THIS conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rennes Templar

“So true. I can’t understand all the people who won’t vote for him.”

That’s okay. Not everyone understands the concept of principles. God knows McCain doesn’t.


86 posted on 02/26/2008 12:55:44 AM PST by Bull Market (I will not vote for John McCain. Hillary's my girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I sure do. He’ll be easy fodder when we regroup and run an actual conservative candidate in 2012.


87 posted on 02/26/2008 12:57:25 AM PST by Bull Market (I will not vote for John McCain. Hillary's my girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SAJ

“The question is: will you assist, even en passant as it were, in turning over what’s left of the Republic to an absolutely clear-cut Marxist?”

Clearly, that is what the people of both parties have demanded. Hence our current candidates.


88 posted on 02/26/2008 1:14:31 AM PST by Bull Market (I will not vote for John McCain. Hillary's my girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Bull Market
Bull, you've seen my commentary about McQueeg. One thing he is not, is a Marxist. A big government jerkoff, to be sure, but not a Marxist.

And that's about the only compliment I can honestly pay him.

89 posted on 02/26/2008 1:17:30 AM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus
"Even so, the most important issue facing the U.S. today is terrorism."

Only in the minds of terrorists and those who are terrified.

90 posted on 02/26/2008 1:24:52 AM PST by Dick Holmes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DennisR

I agree with your earlier response. He is the only viable “vote against the marxist candidate” we have this year. He is wrong on so many issues but the other guy/gal is worse.

I will hold my nose and with no enthusiasm check his name on my ballot. I hate it.... but I have two small children and I owe it to them to vote against the defeatocrat socialists.

I re-registered as an independent by the way and many here will find my choice repugnant to conservative thinking. I do too but I must select the lesser evil this year hoping for a conservative revival next cycle. The alternative is just too bad this year....

If I thought it would straighten out the GOP in 4 years to not vote for him on principle I would do it. However, I honestly think 4 years of a liberal socialist in the white house with a liberal congress would destroy us.

I imagine most will ultimately come around to the same line of thinking but I understand if they don’t..... I said the same thing a few weeks ago.

Sad.


91 posted on 02/26/2008 1:53:02 AM PST by volunbeer (Dear heaven.... we really need President Reagan again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Williams
but even more so an American MEXNAFTA'ian

Fixed it for you. America is no more.

92 posted on 02/26/2008 3:02:52 AM PST by MrPiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

For me, the choice is simple:

I can vote for a Republican who is truly a Democrat, or I can vote for a Democrat who is truly, at best, a Socialist or, more likely, a Communist.

The impending SJC appointments are what really matters. If we give those away, we are lost for decades.


93 posted on 02/26/2008 3:59:47 AM PST by islander-11 (Save Nantucket - Vote Republican!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Names Ash Housewares

I’m afraid a video of the really really bad guy is no way to convince me to vote for the really bad guy. Pedal your wares elsewhere.


94 posted on 02/26/2008 4:11:41 AM PST by King of Florida (A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

Why don’t you write rino backwards on your forehead... we all know it but you need to be reminded. Blame Conservatives for backing one of the two Conservatives that ran is NOT Conservative!

LLS


95 posted on 02/26/2008 4:13:50 AM PST by LibLieSlayer ("There is no conservative alternative in the race. It's just that simple." Rush Limbaugh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

It will never be time to support McNut.


96 posted on 02/26/2008 4:33:58 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (And close the damned borders!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus
HUckabee is a socialist — he just happens to be religious, but he is callous enough to use his religion for political purposes and to further his own ego — not very Christian like behavior.

The most apparent thing I can read from this is FocusNexus saying, "I am libelous."

I suggest you study Mike Huckabee's actual, conservative, Republican positions; also, study what socialism is.

As for your impugning a Christian's character, for putting his Christian understanding to use for America's sake, you may be ignorant, but that is merely evil.

97 posted on 02/26/2008 4:40:54 AM PST by unspun (Mike Huckabee: Government's job is "protect us, not have to provide for us." Duncan Hunter knows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: FocusNexus

blah, blah, blah...


98 posted on 02/26/2008 4:42:17 AM PST by TADSLOS ( McCain-Feingold: "Good for thee but not for me"- John McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Names Ash Housewares
Find me where Hilda-bama says anything like this...

“I will fight every moment of every day in this campaign to make sure that Americans are not deceived by the eloquent but empty calls for change that promises no more than a holiday from history and a return to the false promises and failed policies of a tired philosophy that trusts in government more than people.”

Or comes even close to McCain in supporting our troops and the war against islamo facism.

There's a divide in conservatism on this. It's not quite a disagreement, more a matter of emphasis. What are the most important issues facing the country? If winning in Iraq is the most important task facing the next president then of course McCain is the man. He's got the experience and the credibility.

But what if winning in Iraq is second or third place, after immigration and free speech? Or after taxes and regulation? What if winning in Iraq is optional? That's heresy around here but you know the Wall Street Journal, whatever its editorial policy, is full of people who couldn't care less about Iraq.

I'd bet that if you could do a survey of FR posters that asked what issue mattered most to them and then asked if they supported McCain the people who answered "Winning in Iraq" would give McCain a landslide victory.

Because FR is, on the whole, far more in favor of winning in Iraq than the general public (or even rank and file Republicans if polls are to be believed) McCain's 63% support among Freepers may be greater than his support among the conservative base, which includes people who are not, to put it as diplomatically as possible, encouraged to post on FR.

If so, McCain is in even worse trouble than I thought.

99 posted on 02/26/2008 4:44:14 AM PST by MaxFlint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Names Ash Housewares
Thanks for posting the 52 seconds. Everyone should watch that.

52 seconds

100 posted on 02/26/2008 4:50:46 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-122 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson