Posted on 03/06/2008 9:56:03 PM PST by kingattax
It isn't just to blame the Democrats. It will happen anyway, regardless of which POS gets in the white house. McCain will have no mandate, and he will compromise and appease the liberals.
The country is divided on the war. We do not stand united, and not all of that is the fault of the Democrats. The Republicans aren't serious about it either- Fighting Al Queda in Iraq, and Afghanistan, while supporting them in Kosovo. They sound the clarion call and rattle their sabers abroad, yet posture with soft platitudes regarding our gates- our ports and our borders. It is disjointed and contradictory, and is exactly why the Republicans show a sustained loss in confidence in the nation.
It is a bitter, bitter pill to swallow, but I am convinced that America will have to take another blow before she will wake up and gird her loins properly.
The GOP.
the democrats would just take over the whole economy and blame the evil corporations.
Bump that. You and I seem to see eye to eye, FRiend.
I’m not willing to take those kinds of risks. There will be more terror if the dems win, just like during the carter years. Everyone will be emboldened: Putin, Chavez, kim il Jung and of course all the islamic groups.
And that is why I posted that picture.
There is no greater security risk to the United States right now than the ability of any enemy to freely cross our border and infiltrate our country, for any nefarious end.
What will you do when it turns out that the perpetrators of the next terror attack walked right across the border, or got in through one of the post-9/11 programs to bring in students and visitors from places like Saudi Arabia?
Electing John McCain does not mitigate that risk. It in fact increases that risk by another order of magnitude - should his policies succeed, we would lose an essential tool to eject those foreigners inside our country believed to be planning acts of war against us.
I know, and now, so do we all... And we should be doubly cautious to be sure we elect Republicans of the highest integrity, lest we make that mistake yet again.
Now McCain is a guy who voted to cut medicare and bring school choice
WooHoo! ...Except his amnesty will add half a trillion dollars to medicare and force states to school all those new citizens in one fell swoop.
[...] but the anti-mccain conservatives had no problem with Romney who wanted mandated universal health care that subsidized abortion or Huckabee who cozied up to the NEA and raised taxes and wanted to pay college tuition for illegals...and none of them had a clue about national security. Why is that ok?
It wasn't, and all the Conservatives I know were pretty much out of the game once Tancredo and Hunter were out of the game... Another quarter of Thompson' supporters refused to go on to anyone too.
Romney lost in the South, Huck lost in the West, and McCain's entire support with little exception comes from blue states where no one will vote for him anyway. None of them were fit, and none of them were 'electable'.
Our ability to win the White House ended the day Hunter left the field... He was the last Conservative, and the last one able to bring together the formidable Reagan Coalition. All the rest of this has just been shadow boxing and hot air.
And therein lies the true road to appeasement... the half a loaf theory.
so tell mccain to do something about the border. We should oppose any new amnesty plan. We did it before. But that doesn’t mean we should let obama dump the whole country into the toilet.
Besides, even if you build a Berlin wall, terrorists will just dig a tunnel or come in through some other way. You have to get them at the source and that is what we’re doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
After voting for someone whose primary issue is throwing the border wide open, is that realistic? To this day he still insists his bill was not amnesty, although by any reasonable definition of the word it almost certainly was. It would be just as reasonable - perhaps even more so - to expect to be able to influence a Democrat on this issue. The Democrats are pro-illegals but they haven't made it their signature issue like McCain has.
Besides, even if you build a Berlin wall, terrorists will just dig a tunnel or come in through some other way.
A wall would make it much harder to infiltrate the country. It is not a Berlin Wall that we need; what we need is a Great Wall of China, and for the same reasons - to keep a foreign barbarian population from overrunning the country. The Chinese version has been extremely effective. Anyway, if you are going to pursue that line of thinking to its logical end, why have any defensive security measures at all, if our enemies will simply find another way?
You have to get them at the source and that is what we’re doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The source is not Iraq and Afghanistan. The source is in every Islamic community on the planet. As long as there are followers of Muhammad's example, there will be an enemy we must kill in order to ensure our own survival. In Iraq and Afghanistan, anyone who has been paying close attention can tell you that the enemy is foreign to those lands - they come in from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. We have not even begun to address the actual source of the enemy forces. When we defeated Rommel's tanks in North Africa, they was certainly the enemy but definitely not the source of the enemy.
Hunter had his own problems too. He was for the same economic policies of herbert Hoover. He was also involved in some of the things that helped lose the House in 2006.
You have to keep in mind that the House republicans have a really bad reputation from the Hastert/DeLay years. McCain was one of the only ones who distanced themselves from those kinds of politics.
It is much harder to hide one's activities if one cannot blend into the (up to) 30,000 illegals a day that are currently streaming in... And it is much harder to move nefarious materials if the logistical support of the smuggling trade is cut off...
Assuming (naively, perhaps) that all of the foregoing on is genuinely the case; and not; rather, a clumsy, baldfaced lie on their parts... then, logically: they certainly don't need either the votes or the campaign donations of we conservatives, obviously.
Get all those indys and "moderates" to foot the bill; do the volunteer work; and pull the lever for him come Election Day, then.
but mccain understands the source of terrorism. Obama will make that source stronger. He’d also eliminate missile defense and weaken the military. It’s not so easy to repair...we had 9/11 because clinton was playing around with our defenses for 8 years. But it happened under Bush’s watch so he got the blame instead.
Nope.
To this day he still insists his bill was not amnesty, although by any reasonable definition of the word it almost certainly was.
Yup.
It would be just as reasonable - perhaps even more so - to expect to be able to influence a Democrat on this issue. The Democrats are pro-illegals but they haven't made it their signature issue like McCain has.
Yup.
I am not so sure about that. My humble opinion - take it for what it is worth - is that a person who really understands the source of terrorism would make energy policy reform his top priority. The difference between our enemy being a bunch of ignorant, provincial goat herders, and an enemy with global reach and sophisticated in modern technology, comes down to how much money they have to spend to pursue their war against us. The amount of money they have to spend, in turn, is directly related to how much we pay them for their oil. By exploiting domestic energy resources and developing new nuclear power plants, we could drive our enemies to the brink of defeat without needing to fire a shot, as well as being able to then wash our hands of a whole host of unpleasant foreign entanglements that are currently required only because of the need to secure energy supplies.
so I’ll volunteer for the campaign instead. I never campaigned for any GOP presidential candidate before because NY was always given up for blue.
so I’ll volunteer for the campaign instead.
My point. ;)
Nonsense, and don't eve start with the 'protectionist' crap...
He was also involved in some of the things that helped lose the House in 2006.
Oh really. Regarding Hunter and Delay specifically, the veracity of the evidence seems to be less important than the seriousness of the charge.
And Hunter btw, was the only candidate who polled over 90% on this forum. Everyone was willing to vote for him, and probably Tancredo too, had he been likewise polled. No one else got better than 70's AFAIR.
Thanks for that image. I’ve been holding onto a RNC business reply postage paid donation envelope, waiting for something appropriate to drop into it. A brick didn’t fit.
he does. He’s for nuclear power. He wants to move the world away from oil.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/Speeches/13bc1d97-4ca5-49dd-9805-1297872571ed.htm
Al Qaeda must revel in the irony that America is effectively helping to fund both sides of the war they caused. As we sacrifice blood and treasure, some of our gas dollars flow to the fanatics who build the bombs, hatch the plots, and carry out attacks on our soldiers and citizens. Iran made over $45 billion from oil sales in 2005, and it is the number one state sponsor of terrorism.
The transfer of American wealth to the Middle East helps sustain the conditions on which terrorists prey. Some of the most oil-rich nations are the most stagnant societies on earth. As long as petro-dollars flow freely to them those regimes have little incentive to open their politics and economies so that all their people may benefit from their countries’ natural wealth. The Middle East’s example is spreading to our own hemisphere. Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez is using his country’s oil revenues to establish a dictatorship, bully his neighbors and succeed Castro as Latin America’s leading antagonist of the United States. The politics of oil impede the global progress of our values, and restrains governments from acting on the most basic impulses of human decency. There is only one reason China has opposed sanctions to pressure Sudan to stop the killing in Darfur: China needs Sudan’s oil.
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.