Posted on 02/24/2009 7:14:01 PM PST by Jean S
It was not me who was raging at the Libertarians- I just rose to defend them. You WERE the one who began this with your seething toward anyone on Rabs' list.
The McCain/Palin ticket never had a chance in hell, and I said so all along. Far FAR better to have thrown the Republicans on on their asses, as they so rightly deserved. Far better to have stood for a principled candidate and lifted him up- If we had, perhaps the Conservatives would have turned out, and we would not be looking at Obama now. Those who voted McCain/Palin assured Obama's victory, and compromised every Conservative ideal to do so.
It isn't too hard to label NeoCons, btw. Look up Reagan Conservatism some time and learn the difference.
If you are looking for a Libertarian reply, you are barking up the wrong tree. I am generally in favor of the GWOT, certainly in favor of the war in Afghanistan, and fairly in favor of the war in Iraq, though not for the stated reasons (though I believe I understand the actual reasons). That being said, I am generally against Geo. Bush's foreign policy as being disjointed, unfocused and half-assed.
And having never supported Ron Paul specifically because of his position on the GWOT, your pictures have no particular effect upon me.
Sarah Palin doesn't lack conservative credentials.
Sarah Palin is not a Conservative. She is a moderate populist.
As to Ron Paul's Conservative credentials, He is very small "c" conservative with a hard Libertarian bend. He is FAR to the right of Palin, Bush, and McCain on most issues, and there are very many things I can agree with him on. The sole reason I could not support him was the WOT, and that largely because we were already in it.
Regarding military intervention abroad, that is typical of the Libertarian mindset, and it is not to be discarded out of hand. Their distaste of foreign entanglements keeps us honest. If you are wholly without the Libertarians' support, especially when we were attacked, you had better look to your conduct. They are prone to bitching in any foreign war- That is their job. But you will find no greater patriots anywhere, providing there is just cause.
As far as the "War on Drugs" is concerned, if Republicans were in the least bit serious about it, that damn border would not be wide open, I can tell you that, so get down off your high horse.
Reagan's table has a chair for the Libertarians- I will not disrespect their views, no matter how popular it may be in the Republican party to do so. That it is so popular is a good indication of how far from Reagan the Republicans have devolved- And that is why I am a Republican no longer.
You’re just being childish now.
Yes I was too.
I was shocked to see that a poster I was jousting with last nite was very negative about Palin so my comments to him/her were loaded to a certain degree.
I was trying to agree with the poster on his absurd comments to see how deep he was in the camp of the MSM and others that dis and dissed Sarah and I noticed there was no positive effect.
It was hard to read the gobs of words, so I just stopped.
You are absolutely correct, Palin brought McCain millions of votes IMO but some still blame her for losing.
As one of my posts yesterday explained, McCain might as well have been campaigning for Obama.
He was a horrible choice for the GOP and the MSM and the open primary to choose to run.
Good idea.
Excellent points.
I most emphatically disagree. DeMint is well-qualified and would make an excellent VP choice for President Palin.
Defend them by ranting about 'neocons' and accusing me of assult? Like I said, you suck at defending your pals.
Far FAR better to have thrown the Republicans on on their asses
This is what I was saying the whole time. You Paulites favored Obama over McCain in the general election.
Those who voted McCain/Palin assured Obama's victory
This statement doesn't even come close to making sense.
It isn't too hard to label NeoCons
Of course it doesn't. Spouting off inane rhetoric of the Paulites and the far left doesn't even require any intelligence.
This vague statement doesn't answer my question. You mentioned 'the neocon dream'. What do you mean when you say 'the neocon dream'?
and fairly in favor of the war in Iraq, though not for the stated reasons
Perhaps you could elaborate on this statement.
Sarah Palin is not a Conservative.
I triple dog dare you, (that's right, I engaged in slight breach of etiquette by skipping the triple dare and going right for the throat), I triple dog dare you to post this as it's own thread, declaring that Palin isn't a conservative. And make sure you rant about 'neocons' in your post.
Tell it to someone who will listen. You and I both know you were just trying to get a reaction out of me because you know I don’t care for Palin. Same with your schtick directed towards me that, “Sarah Palin should have given the Republican response.”
As I said, I have never supported Ron Paul.
[roamer_1:] Those who voted McCain/Palin assured Obama's victory
This statement doesn't even come close to making sense.
Sure it does. It is called "Kicking a dead horse". Every Conservative around said there was no way McCain would win, and no way they would ever vote for him, yet rampant Republicanism had it's way anyway, taking the wind away from any possibility of a grassroots movement. So, you got your shot and lost. Live with it.
Regardless of whichever third party kook you supported, whether you sat at home and pouted, or wether you voted for zero, you favored Obama over McCain in the general election. That was my point the whole time.
Sure it does
No it doesn't. Voting for McCain/Palin did not assure Obama's victory. Like I said, that makes no sense what-so-ever. And the idea that 'every' conservative said there is no way they would vote for McCain/Palin in the general election is no less absurd than your other goofy claims. Also, I'm still waiting for you to define what you consider to be the 'neocon dream'. And how come you didn't take me up on my triple-dog-dare?
The "new conservatism" is the "kinder, gentler" conservatism of the Baker Moderates, which has moved to bastardize everything Conservative and turn it to it's own devices- The final outcome, to my reckoning, seems to be Globalism, but whatever it is, it has nothing at all to do with the Conservatism of Reagan.
Reagan Conservatism is all about principle- it is a pact between the lesser conservative factions to only vote for candidates who uphold the tenets of all three factions- That is what a big "C" Conservative is.
NeoConservatism seeks to change the very definitions by which Conservatives set their values by using the same names and proscribing different values to them, while denigrating those things which used to be the placeholders for those names.
Reaganite "Free Trade" has become protectionism, and "Free Trade" now means "Anything goes". Reagan's Trickle Down Economics and Raw Capitalism has become Keynesian Third Way Economics, And what was once solid support for the Constitution has become compromise and capitulation- To the point that our very sovereignty is being undermined. What was once the party of social justice, of God's own Law has largely become a compromise with multi-culturalism. And what was once the honorable ideal of lifting up our foe and fixing what we broke, has become... wait for it... interventionism just as our Libertarian friends have bemoaned.
[roamer_1:] and fairly in favor of the war in Iraq, though not for the stated reasons
Perhaps you could elaborate on this statement.
Simple strategy suggests that it is easier to kill the ragheads in a sandbox than it is to kill them on the rocky spines of the mountains of Afghanistan- A place which has broken the back of every army that has ever ventured there.
I am not in favor of the certain discrepancies which do exist within the greater WOT... Backing Muslims against the Serbs for instance- A monumental and asinine misfortune. Kosovo is the back door into Europe, and we are handing it to our enemies.
I triple dog dare you, (that's right, I engaged in slight breach of etiquette by skipping the triple dare and going right for the throat), I triple dog dare you to post this as it's own thread, declaring that Palin isn't a conservative. And make sure you rant about 'neocons' in your post.
I do not post threads, as I am not here long enough to mind one properly- But I have not been bashful about my position regarding Palin or NeoCons. I will offer you the very same question I have posted numerous times on Palin threads (and Jindal threads for that matter), having never been given a satisfactory reply:
By her RECORD, that is, what she has already done and already said, explain to me how Sarah Palin can unite the three pillars of Reagan Conservatism. It is my position that she cannot, and will defend against her based upon all three pillars, upon any of which she is too weak to stand as a conservative in her own right.
This is a very common question, and one which any Reaganite can be judged by forthwith.
I favored *neither*, as I said. I will not be forced into voting for socialism, just because it has an "R" behind it.
No it doesn't. Voting for McCain/Palin did not assure Obama's victory. Like I said, that makes no sense what-so-ever. And the idea that 'every' conservative said there is no way they would vote for McCain/Palin in the general election is no less absurd than your other goofy claims.
I know *no one* who voted for McCain, and I know *no one* who voted for Obama. *NONE*. Furthermore, of my entire ring of friends and associates, including those I used to scrounge money with *for* the Republicans, I don't know of a single *one* who is still a Republican. Does that offer you any clues? And I come from very staunch Reaganite Pro-Life, Pro-Republican, very politically active surroundings.
Everyone I know left the Republican party over Geo. Bush or John McCain.
Well, you did react to both of my posts by shooting flames my way that were far out of proportion to my simple suggestions that Palin give the Republican response to Obama and that De Mint might be a good choice as Palin's VP.
What is it about Sarah Palin that generates such visceral hatred from some who are otherwise clearly on the conservative side?
GoodDay - Thank you for that link. That was a very interesting exchange.
I wish they would have gotten into Global Warming. That fraud is the greatest threat to our freedom today.
Most of all, though, thanks for turning me on to PopModal...hadn’t heard of that site, and it’s GREAT!
It’s now bookmarked.
Hank
Here is the DU post in question
I know it is you, you have OK flags at both sites. Why do you donate to DU? Why are you here?
Who?
Romney? Jindal? Gingrich?
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.