|
UPDATE: Some Conservatives have said that they will reluctantly vote for McCain because the Democrats would pull out of Iraq. But with the Iraqis taking responsibility for more of their country every day, and the terrorists reduced to begging for help and using retarded women as unwitting suicide bombers, another year or so will almost certainly see Iraq in a place where we can officially turn everything over to the Iraqi government. And since the next President won't take office for another year, and there's no way on Earth to pull the troops out before at least another six to nine months after that, there's no need to sacrifice the future of our own country and the Republican party for Iraq. And that's what a vote for McCain would do -- surrender our own country to amnesty, tax hikes, anti-business legislation and all the rest of the agenda that Republicans in Congress could not fight under McCain, but may fight under a Democrat. |
| SallyGirl February 7, 2008 07:15 PM PST I am just sick... I know why Mitt lost the primary, he did act like a bit of a jackass (as did McCain) with all the attacking. He should've waited until McCain had been the ugly one. Oh well, there's always 2012! | ||
| AlphaPatriot February 7, 2008 08:44 PM PST Two questions. If Obama is president, would he really be worse than four years of "bi-partisan" legislation between a Democrat congress and John "RINO" McCain? Second, if Hillary is president, is there a chance that the nation will react strong enough at mid-term elections to give congress back to the Republicans? No way will I ever vote for McCain. | ||
| CavalierX February 7, 2008 11:30 PM PST >If Obama is president, would he >really be worse than four years >of "bi-partisan" legislation >between a Democrat congress >and John "RINO" McCain? I'd rather see Hillary get the White House. She's a more polarising figure; it'd be easier for Republicans to stick together to fight her. >Second, if Hillary is president, is >there a chance that the nation will >react strong enough at mid-term >elections to give congress back to >the Republicans? If there are enough Republicans in the Senate to filibuster Democratic legislation, they may have a shot at taking at least one House of Congress back. But only if they fight. | ||
| Jim February 8, 2008 08:02 AM PST Perhaps Mitt was a bit strong in his "attacks," but there's a difference between attacking a person's voting record and attacking their character. Not once did I see Mitt use the wrong attack. | ||
| Name Don L February 10, 2008 12:59 PM PST Love your political commentary -didn't realize you have a blog. I for one have already sent my Dear John (McCain) letter to the GOP | ||
| Huckupchuck February 11, 2008 12:19 AM PST Again, I have to say that I admire the strength of your convictions. I understand the reasons behind them. I can't say I agree fully with the argument, but I respect it. If many feel as you do, then I'll certainly be a happy camper come November. At least it has you blogging again, and that's a good thing! | ||
| Name Don L February 17, 2008 04:28 PM PST Don't forget Mac's support for embryonic medical experimentation -nothing like the destruction of a human to have some parts to experiment with. | ||
| cogs May 15, 2008 10:30 AM PDT I haven’t received your email blast for months now. Not since you decided to ‘cancel’ my subscription to it after chastising you for telling us how you would not vote for Giulianni if he were the Republican nominee. Now I see, in your post on Thursday Feb. 7 – ‘Year of the Liberal’, that you’ve remained consistent in your pursuit of failure for the Republican party in 2008. Strange how someone can be so diluted by their political philosophy as to somehow count losing as winning. (“Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil…”) To base your decision about this country’s imminent future on your theory that it would be better if a man with a paternal relationship to an America hating Afro-Liberation Theologian and political arrangements with American terrorists and Hamas and Hezbollah lackeys; a man whose wife, living and working in elite circles and who enjoys a uniquely American lifestyle of opulence and renown, can’t find one good thing to say about her country and continues to stump with the zeal of Lenin himself, should become president based on your assumptions about the sympathies of particular Democratic legislators. You must spend a lot of time in casinos my friend because that is a gamble rational people can’t afford to make. Certainly more of a tantrum than a strategy. | ||
| DM July 22, 2008 10:32 PM PDT Thank you, Bush and Kerry, for bringing about the Year of the Liberal! There's a certain temptation to be smug about how much of a disaster Bush has been, and waking up people to the fact that even lousy Kerry would have been a better president. But, hot damn! This awakening came back to the American people with an almost atavistic force. However the election goes, Americans everywhere have already said to conservatives: f*** you and the neocon wankers you rode in on. You'd better vote for McCain, because Obama is going to show you real "uniter" leadership if he gets in office. It is going to drive conservative partisans red faced and crazy with frustrated rage. | ||
| Leave a Comment: |