Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Comment on: Calling a Spade a Spade

The Lost Cause

110 Comments
Thursday, September, 18, 2008 11:26 PM dawndawn writes:

Doing the Right Thing --

Hey, Flagwaver -- Thank you for your realization that voting for a third party would be a vote for O -- No matter what we may think of him as a politician, a vote for JMac is a vote for America -- He does have a way of making us scream (often) but above all, he is an honorable person and will always put America first -- Now we just have to convince those 5,000,000 other holdouts! --
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, September, 18, 2008 11:33 PM Edamon50 writes:

dawndawn

Like I said, i am not sure that I can fully support McCain at this point but I know I can't support Obama. I just think that we conservatives are holding out on McCain because he won't do what we want. Honestly, his decisions to stand against the tide and oppose the GOP at times makes me respect him; I may not agree with his stands all the time, but at least I can be reasonably sure that his decisions are based on principle...and not political expediency.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:03 AM Redhead writes:

Flagwaver

“[T]he myth that to be Republican means to be conservative. In fact, in my memory the GOP has only produced on real “movement conservative” as President and we all know who that is.”
The best President in my lifetime, that’s who! And it was BECAUSE he was a Conservative, not in spite of it!

“We conservatives have fought the fight for this election cycle and we lost.”
It doesn’t have to be this way, but I understand what you are saying. It is hard to consider the possibility that my fighting against McCain may lead to President Oba… President Ob… I can’t say it. But I’m not ready to give up being a Conservative.

That’s all right Flag. I won’t go on. I respect your choice. But first, one last parting shot…

“He survived that fight and he grabbed the brass ring with both hands, so to speak.”

They should have put it right above his head!
Okay, I know, it was low… I’ll apologize in advance…
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:17 AM clyde writes:

Flagwaver

You are correct about conservatives losing the fight for this election,Flag,but I believe it is PARAMOUNT to show our disgust to the RNC over this crap. What other tool is in our box than financial support,and votes? We have no other tools. I WILL NOT let my only tools be dropped out of fear of scraping my knuckles. Should you decide to vote for McCain,you will have made the correct decision for yourself,based on YOUR beliefs,not because you feel the need to please some one. Same here,no matter how I decide.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:27 AM Edamon50 writes:

Redhead

I know that conservatism wins when it is the basis of a campaign, but I also know that you have to take what you get sometimes. And as much as we conservatives bridle at the thought, the fact of the matter is that John McCain won the nomination by the rules as they are now. Just because I don't see the point in continuing to make war on John McCain doesn't mean that I have abandoned my principles; it simply means that I recognize the facts as they are, and I accept them.

I am simply saying that the time to fight against McCain was in the primaries and we allowed that fight to get away from us. While we were moaning about Ron Paul, cursing Fred Thompson for getting in too late, and ripping Mitt Romney to shreds, John McCain was steadily working his way back into the race and gathering enough support to win the nomination.

As for your parting shot...I would not have expected that from you. That sound's just like the kind of "joke" we could expect from some our liberal friends.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:35 AM Edamon50 writes:

Clyde

You have hit on the very reason I think so many conservatives get so worked up about McCain when you said, "[Y]ou will have made the correct decision for yourself,based on YOUR beliefs,not because you feel the need to please some one." It is because McCain has done just that in the Senate that so many of us feel the need to attack him. He has a record (very well highlighted by Philosophocon) that reflects that very attitude; he has supported or opposed certain positions based on his beliefs, not on what the GOP claims to believe in. When he makes those stands, he doesn't do it to curry favor with anyone (not even conservatives) and that drives us crazy. We all claim we want our Senators to represent us, not the Party they belong to, but when a legislator does exactly that we lose our minds! I have been unhappy with a lot of things Senator McCain has done, but I have always respected him because I knew that he was just following his conscience, not trying to pander to anyone.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:52 AM A Right Brainer writes:

Flagwaver

There are many of us that feel your pain.
There are even more of us who have come to the same conclusions you have.
Many bloggers on TH have outlined thier reasons, nad god bless them for doing so, why they can't or won't but they fail to realize the insignificance of their vote wasting. (shameless plug time) I outlined their futility in a recent post.
The bottomline is they will have 0 effect on the national election and as such, will go entirely unnoticed by either party. They'll be in the same boat next itme.
In essance they are like the liberals who threaten to move to Canada if they don't get their way.
If it means anything, I think you made the right choice. McCain is not a liberal, though he makes liberal like choices at times, he is a conservative.
There is enough divisiveness between the right and left, without heaping onto it divisviness within our ranks. Its not about abandoning our princibles, but rising above differences to come together. That is exactly what America is all about. There will always be something about a canidate we don't like.

Keep the Faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 12:06 PM Edamon50 writes:

Right Brainer

Thanks for the visit and the post. Like I have stated elsewhere, i have not decided to vote for McCain, and I respect the decisions that others make in this situation. But I am just getting weary of hearing how bad McCain is, or will be and I am tired of the idea that four years of Democrat control will be just the medicine the country needs. Like I said, I don't see an Obama administration as castor oil, but as arsenic; he may not be able to get a great deal of legislation to his desk, but he could absolutely turn the federal judiciary into a left wing haven. And how much damage would that do to the nation?

McCain is not everyone's cup of tea, and he may not be mine...but the more I see and hear from Obama-Biden, the better McCain-Palin starts to look!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 12:30 PM BrianR writes:

Well, Flag, you knew

I'd weigh in.

You wrote: "but I also know that you have to take what you get sometimes."

Unfortunately the very attitude that's turned California into a disaster area.


As to the primaries: they were stacked right from the jump to minimize conservatives and conservatism. Open and winner-take-all, a strategy that's determined at the national HQ level.

The game was rigged, pard. When someone cheats you at cards, do you just pony up without raising hell?


I've been getting donation literature from the GOP for well over a year targetting against the Dems in hysterical terms. This literature NEVER talked about conservatism being the answer, it was all sheer emotional panic and hysteria.

And whenever it talked about GOP candidates, it talked about that vague concept of "electability", not the formal concept of "conservatism". And whenever it mentioned candidates, it was always Giuliani (first), then McCain.

Why was there never any literature talking about Hunter, or Tancredo, or either of the Thompsons? Not even Romney.


The game was rigged, compadre, and now they can just go screw themselves, as far as I'm concerned. They didn't EARN my support, and they're surely not going to get it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 12:38 PM philosophocon writes:

Flag, very well articulated arguments,

as usual. I agre that we've had enough back and forth that there's no need to rehash old points, so I'll just make a couple of quick comments.

First, as an individual candidate McCain is better than Obama, and I am cognizant of the fact that I have far more disagreements with Obama than McCain. But there are important ramifications depending on who is elected, which leads me to believe that, on balance, the election of McCain would have a greater overall negative impact. But we've beat that hosrse to death, so let's move on.

With respect to the GOP and conservatives, I happen to think that a conservative GOP is what's best for the country. If you have parties that are eseentially liberal and liberal light, you won't have to worry about anyone moving to Canada, you'll become it. For example, there won't be any substantive debate on whether or not cap and trade should be implemented, but rather the debate will be whether the Dem cap and trade plan is better than the Repub one. Same with immigration, it's not a question of whether or not there's amnesty, it's a question of whose version, Dem or Repub.

The list will get longer and longer, cover more and more issues, and as liberal premises become generally accepted the conservative vs. liberal debate becomes merely window-dressing about implementation. That is Canadian politics more or less in a nutshell, and probably California politics as well, subject to confirmation by Brian and PasPhil. I don't wish it on you. Not by a long shot.

OK, maybe they weren't such quick points, but well, that's hardly surprising is it?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 1:16 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Flawed Logic

The fatal flaw with the logic expressed by the anti Mcain crowd is the belief that such will ACTUALLY have an effect that increases conservativism. In alllikelyhood it will do more to marginalize us and our beliefs... "those whacko third party voters"
An abstinance vote or a third party vote is insignificant and inconsequential. The GOP will not recognize it as such.
As much as we want it to be, the given the state of the citizenry's mindset, it preclude us from having an "all of the above canidate." Period end of story.
Voting for Mcain is not a compromise of princible but and acceptance of political reality.
Instead of harping about how this canidate or that canidate would have been better or worse, that effort should be directed at promoting conservativism with the GOP.
Your vote is not the only tool you have. You have a voice and you have time. Put it to worthwhile endevors that promote rather than divide conservatives.

Guess I'll stop there lest I write an article.

Keep the Faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 2:35 PM BrianR writes:

No, "right brainer"


History shows you wrong.

The election of Carter led directly to Reagan and real conservatism.

The election of Clinton led directly to the 1994 Contract With America sweep of Congress predicated on pure conervative principles.

Those, BTW, are the last two Democrat Presidents.

So, when they lose the Presidential race, the GOP DOES, in fact, historically rediscover its conervative roots; it gets the message; and gets its act together.

The problem with the GOP is it forgets, then has to be reminded periodically.


"Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it" -- George Santayana

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 3:08 PM miss vicky writes:

Unqualified Rookie scared me to go 4 J.M

Indeed, we do not need a monopoly powered Congress etc,. Moderation and balance is our best chance for true reform. As a Democrat at heart, I regret that I can not support my Party. I lost all hope when the Insensitive, unwise, misguided Obama abandoned the solid,ready bright Clinton and her 18 'million' voters for the WHO? man Biden; with his two failed Pres., attempts and only 'thousands' of backers?! While 'Hill' almost tied and actually won the popular vote, if her Florida win had not been shared with the StrawMan! When she was snubbed, I was going to sit it out but the misleading, extreme liberal has scared me into doing more! Go McCain and Lady Sarah! Ex Democrat
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 5:18 PM A Right Brainer writes:

History huh?

I love people who cite history as an example, but who do so out of context.

Ford lost to Carter because of Nixon.

Carter lost to Reagan, not because of some overwhelming majority of "pure conservatives" in the electorate. He lost because of 444 days of American Hostages held in Iran.

It is fortunate for us that Reagan was the consumate conservtive. But he could he easily have been Bush, Mcain, Dole or anybody else the GOP offered up. The country was ripe for change. Particularly those members of the "greatest generation" that still took pride in America.

Unfortunately, those that were in their 60's then are now well into their 80's or sadly have gone on to their final reward.

In the ensuing 20+ years, the breakdown of the electorate has shifted, the circumstances are vastly different now then in 1980 or 1994 for that matter. The country is divided, deeply over a great many things, many of which you have listed in your own postings. Historically the american electorate preferes divided government.

The "roots" you speak of were only really laid down 20 years ago or so harldy a solid base at this point in history.

In the ned the simple truth is both parties have to deal with the majority within the elctorate, and that majority is center-right at the moment.

When recalling history, context is everything.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 6:25 PM Edamon50 writes:

Brian

Your initial post is the very thing I m talking about...fighting a battle that has laready been lost! The primaries are what they are, but the fact that there were open primaries didn't mean that McCain was predestined to win. Have we all forgotten how dead McCain's candidacy was at one time, and how he managed to resurrect it on the fly?

I don't blame you for being upset at the way the primaries are set up, but complaining about it now doesn't change the outcome. Besides, we all knew that there were a lot of open primaries...but it was no problem when GWB took advantage of that and pulled off a win in 2000...so why is the system seen as so broken now? It is the same system that has been in place for a while now and it was not a major problem until now. And if you don't want to give money to the GOP, don't...I understand that. You know that I have been as frustrated as anyone else with the way the GOP has done its business lately, but that's not the point. The point is that we have to choose whether we want to do what's best for the Nation or what's best to reform the Party. And we all know that even after Reagan and Newt, conservative voices have never really controlled the Party.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 6:30 PM BrianR writes:

Man, "right brainer"


You must be a kid. Pard, I'm 59 years old, was a Reagan volunteer, and worked on that election, and if you think it was about Iran, your history teachers let you down.

Iran was almost a sideshow at the time. We were in the midst of huge unemployment, grotesque interest and inflation rates, housing values in the Dumpster, an overall bumbling and placatory foreign policy of which Iran was only a small part... in other words, classic liberal foolhardiness.

Iran was only one of a great many issues that were important in that campaign, and wasn't anywhere near being the top of the list. The Soviet Union was HUGELY more worrying than Iran.

You said it could have easily been Bush. Well, news flash, pard. Bush LOST to Reagan in the primaries. As did Dole, too, as I recall.

You then go on to try to minimize the relevance of history. But it doesn't wash, because that history is a lot more relevant than mere speculation, or some idea that McCain is going to magically transform himself into a conservative, or that political dynamics aren't what they are.

Human nature is what it is. We see exactly my posit enacted on an ongoing basis right here in California, where the GOP continues to shift ever-Left BECAUSE it never suffers any penalty for doing so.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 6:33 PM Edamon50 writes:

Philo

I hear what you're saying, but I want you to answer me one question: Are your objections about the policies or about the Party? Because it seems to me that much of your argument is about protecting the conservative image of the GOP, more than worrying about the actual policies that will be promulgated. I agree that a conservative GOP is great for America, but how often do we GET a conservative GOP? As Brian stated, we only get a conservative GOP after a butt whipping and that conservatism gets lost as soon as the GOP reestablishes itself in a position of power. For the GOP conservatism is not guiding principle, but a tactic to be used to gain and hold political power. That is the history that Brian needs to look at, because that is the way the GOP has operated in my lifetime. They used conservatism to elect Reagan, then gave us Bush 41; after losing the White House they gave us Newt in 1994, and followed that by abandoning the very issues that got them the majority; and for the past 8 years we have had a Presidennt who is a nominal conservative on some issues, and a moderate...at best!...on others.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 6:36 PM Edamon50 writes:

Vicky

Thanks for joining the conversation! I think that there may be a whole lot of loyal Democrats out there who feel the same way you do about Obama; even I would feel more comfortable with a President Hillary than a President Obama, because I at least get the feeling that Hillary has a true understanding of the stakes involved here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 6:38 PM BrianR writes:

No, Flag, I don't think

you DO understand the importance of what I wrote.

The initial battle was between Giuliani and McCain, and McCain DID tank. But as soon as Giuliani blew it with his Florida strategy, and it became McCain/Romney, what did the GOP do?

They threw their resources behind McCain. Again, that "electability" issue, rather than any talk about principles or ideology.

Was there ever any support for ANY of the conservatives?

No.

Were the primary rules designed to marginalize conservatives and minimize their impact?

Yes.

It really is that simple. We had non-Repubs voting in our primaries. That's a HUGE factor.

Further, if you look at the primary results in those that took place before Romney withdrew, you'll see that had it not been for winner-take-all, we'd have had a VERY different race going on. If we'd had proportioned primaries, Romney would most likely be the candidate. He usually placed second in the pre-Giuliani-dropout races, so he'd have hung in against McCain, as he'd have had MORE delegates by that point than McCain.

Romney I could have voted for.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 6:46 PM BrianR writes:

BTW, Flag


At least here in Cali the state GOP makes no bones about their intent. They flat-out say that the reason our state primaries are open is that they're trying to "broaden their appeal", and lessen the impact of "ideologues". They actually use that term: "Ideologues".

Well, I guess I'm an "ideologue". Damn those silly principles I hold!

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 6:48 PM Edamon50 writes:

Brian

I'm only 37 years old (in a week or so), but in my lifetime i have only seen the GOP use conservatism as a tactic. Remember, when Reagan won it was not with the backing of the GOP establishment, and it occassioned the creation of the "Reagan Democrats" to help him win. And if I recall correctly, the Party powers never really embraced Reagan or his acolytes. As soon as he was gone we got a term of Bush 41, a ticket of Dole-Kemp, and two terms of a moderate "compassionate conservative". The turning of the GOP towards a more centrist, or even left drifting type of politics did not start with John McCain. How many truly conservative GOP Presidents have we had? Nixon? Ford? Bush? GW Bush? If we have to go back to Eisenhower, then you have to admit that this drift didn't start with McCain, and that he is simply another in a line of moderate candidates that the GOP has foisted on us. The only difference is that he has been honest about who he is instead of trying to fool the voters into believing that he is a movement conservative.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:13 PM Edamon50 writes:

Brian, you're proving my point!

We have already been over the flaws in the nomination process a million times, but those flaws do not change the fact of who was the winner! That is a fight to be fought another day, and as far as I can tell it has to fought at the state level. But complaining about the nomination of McCain based on a dislike of the nomination process serves no purpose at all! We can't change the outcome, no matter what we think of the process...that is water under the bridge now. Besides, I seem to recall there being some open Democratic primaries as well, and some crossover voting by Republicans in those primaries so the problem exists on both sides of the aisle.

What I am saying is, what is the point of playing what if? You're right, IF we had different rules the outcome may have been very different...but so what? We DON'T have different rules and the outcome is what it is; like the old saying goes, "Were "if's" and "but's" candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas!"

I know you don't like McCain, and that's fine...I'm not saying that should. What I am saying is that the idea that McCain would be worse for the country than Obama is a flawed notion. Maybe a McCain win would be bad for the GOP, which is debatable since this has been the way the GOP has been heading for some time now, but the idea that he would be as bad or worse than Obama is not based on any type of rational thought, but on the anger at the Party for his nomination and at the man for not claiming to be a conservative when he's not.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:23 PM Pasadena Phil writes:

You know....

General Motors HATES that I keep buying Toyotas. Yet, it never seems to help Chrysler! Run that logic past me again about how my voting for Barr is a vote for Obama? What if enough conservatives ignored your logic and voted for Barr? You don't think he could win? Heck, he IS on the ballot isn't he?

What if I was planning to vote for Obama but changed my mind and voted for Barr at the last minute? Do you mean my vote still went for Obama?

Your logic makes no sense. I am voting against the one-party system. I really don't care which of the two socialists wins. I will be fighting them whichever one wins and the truth is that Obama will be easier to stop than McCain.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:25 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Brian

Like a liberal, you decide that because you can't pesuade me with a few out of context "historical facts" it is time to inslut me?

It started with your first response with the BTW coment, I'm fully aware of who the last few democratic Presidents were.

The attitude comes to fruition in your last response to me. For the record, easily determined by going to my blog and looking at my biography, I am not a kid, in fact I'm but a few years younger than you. Not that the age of the messenger adds or subtracts to the inherent truths of his argument.

Where do I begin? You made my points for me...
Point number one: Regan was elected due to the electorate being ready for change. Yes, I truncated the extent of the failed policies of Carter, by choosing the easiest to remember. Had I known you would wish me to lay it all out for you instead of simply invoking the contextual reminder of the times I would have.

Second point: My teachers failed meCorrect and every other student in the country who are now of middle age and able to cast a vote(fortunately, I didn't rely on them to be my sole teacher). Again making my point that the elctorate of the 1980's and early 90's are not the electorate of today.

Thirdly: Indeed they lost to Reagan in the primaries, but you focus on the micro instead of the macro while making my point for me. I will cede that Reagan won the primaries, my point wasn't a history lesson about who ran in the primaries, my point was that any of the canidates in the primary would have won the general election because of the status of the electorate: a status that in no wise exists today.

Do I really need to highlight the disclaimer for you that "past performance is not indicative of future results" As in finance so with politics.

Then after insulting me and making my points you completely mis-read what I wrote and twist it to fit your own view…
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:26 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Brian

Any resonable person would know, that quite to the contrary I was not "minimizing" history. Rather I was putting your supposedly historical references into historical context. And then using that history (in its correct context) to make my point.

I have never once suggested or hinted that Mccain will somehow magically transform himself into uber-conservative. Is this you again applying some preconcieved notion to my mindset, simply because I disagree with you? Is this not another liberal tactic? Your entire point after that presuposition, whatever that point was, is lost because the straw man you set up is false and therefore can't be knocked down.

Again you make my point in reference to our state (another thing you might have figured out). California leans left not because of no consequences for moderate republicans but because the majority of the populace vote left and center left. For any Republican to get in office they have to make at minimum token gestures to the center.

In the spirit of debate and moving this beyond rudimentary insults of age, inteligence, and knowledge.

My argument is not with how you vote, its your choice, as it is mine. Rather my argument is that what keeps conservatives out of office is not The GOP but the make-up of the electorate. If you want "pure conservatives" in office there needs to be more of them in the electorate.

Rather than being devisive with other conservatives (of which I am a pure one,)focus your energies on shifting the electorate to the right.

That sir, is the only way to a) get more conservatives elected, b) effect change in government that we desire, c) hopefully reduce corruption within government. OFr after all "absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Keep the faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:26 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Falg

You made excellent points, it is my contention that the answer to your question on "How we get a conservative GOP" is not found in the party itself, but in the pepole that make up the electorate and therfore the party. We all need to get in the trenches of the cultural war and win some over to our side
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:39 PM BrianR writes:

"Rightbrainer"


I wasn't insulting you; I was pointing out that you're too young to have personal recollection of the actual campaign and you've been fed drivel in your education.

If you want to take that as an insult, feel free to do so. That's the typical response I see when people are corrected on their factual errors. Umbrage. Very impressive.

I took your advice, saw your bio, and you're 39 years old (app). You want to tell me that you have clear memories of Reagan's election? I'm supposed to take that seriously? You were about 11 years old. You'll understand if I give more credence to my own recollections, as I participated while you were in elementary school. I was a homeowner watching housing values crash and interest rates skyrocket and inflation devaluing my money, while you were worrying about whether there was a Twinkie in your lunch box.

I remember VERY WELL what the issues were in that election, and why I was campaigning for Reagan. And it wasn't about Iran.

As to "past performance", etc.... it's certainly no guarantee, but when history continues to repeat itself, IGNORING it is foolishness.

I, at least, have a history to point to and look for guidance.

YOU have nothing other than sheer hope and speculation.


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:43 PM Edamon50 writes:

Pasadena Phil

Who are you addressing with your post? If it is aimed at me, then you need to step back, take a deep breath, and read my post and comments more carefully. I have not said anywhere that a vote for Barr is the same as a vote for Obama, and the only person who raised that issue was dawndawn.

I agree that IF enough conservatives voted for Barr he could have an impact, but that is likely not going to happen...and we all know it.

And could you please explain to me how it would be easier to "stop" Obama than McCain? Stop him from doing what exactly? I keep hearing that somehow the Democrats who presently control Congress would be more willing to work with McCain than Obama, and that McCain could get more legislation passed than Obama. Again I ask: In what alternate universe would that happen?

All you have to do is look at the way the Democrats have tried to paint McCain as some right wing extremist during this campaign, simply because he has the (R) following his name. Do you really believe that they would suddenly become his freaking BFFs if he defeats "The Change We Have Been Waitng For"?

It is this very type of irrational namecalling (since when is John McCain a socialist?) that I am talking about. It is not based on any type of logic or reason, but on a visceral dislike of McCain because he will not pretend to be some movement conservative when he's not.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:43 PM BrianR writes:

Flag


You're the one who raised the issue of primaries, to which I responded. You taking the position that because he won the primaries he earned my vote. Me taking the position that I don't accept that.


More importantly, though, is the crux of the issue: "What I am saying is that the idea that McCain would be worse for the country than Obama is a flawed notion"

It's flawed in YOUR estimation, because like "rightbrain" you refuse to pay any attention to history.

To you, things will be different this time, with McCain.

To which I have yet another quote:

"Insanity is repeating the same action while expecting a different result" -- Albert Einstein

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:48 PM BrianR writes:

PS, to both


I want to make clear that if you're comfortable voting for McCain, that's great! I sincerely mean that.

You've assessed the issues and candidates, and made your decision, and I never fault anyone for that.

However, I expect the same consideration. You may not agree with my conclusions, or even my criteria, but mine are at least as important to me as yours are to you.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:53 PM A Right Brainer writes:

From Insults to mockery

The fun continues...
I am 41 to be exact I was 13 when reagan was eleceted, and indeed I very much recall the issues of the day as my parents and their friends discussed them around the table. I was blessed to be born to those of the greatest generation.
That's cute"twinkie in the lunch box" you're a riot Brian.
You are exactly why people are "turned-off" by conservatives. You do fine preaching to the choir, but can't form a coherent argument when someone doesn't fall-in line with you imediately.
Instead of debating your point or addressing mine, you continue down the demonization of differing opinions path. Am I to preume that because you have a few years on me I should just a
acquiesce and let your falacies go unchallenged?
Your only point so far is in the failure of the primaries I have made several and you have adressed none of them.
Good luck with your foolhearty plan to change the GOP by voting for Barr.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:56 PM Edamon50 writes:

Brian & Right Brainer

Fellas, this is a debate not an spitting contest, okay? Stick to the issues, as they should be enough to keep the conversation going strong; this is about the matter at hand, not a forum for name-calling or pointless "fussing" aswe call it here in the South.

Right Brainer: Brian is no liberal, and so I am pretty sure that being accused of using liberal tactics doesn't sit well with him.

Brian: You have to understand why RB may have taken umbrage at your post aimed at him, because there are times that you are dismissive of people that don't agree with you. That may not be how you mean it, but it sometimes comes off that way.

Now that I have finished playing the moderator role, let's get back to the debate, shall we?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 7:58 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Brian

one last comment then I have to go I hear my moma calling me...

Lets be straight I have never said anything about Mcain being better or he will change period not ever. There is not insanity here.

My understanding is that you wish to have more conservative politicians represent us. Me too!

Our differences lie in achieving that goal. You think a vote for someone else will work. I think it has to be change in the electorate mindset.

Have a great weekend!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 8:01 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Apologies to Flag

Offered with sincerity. :-)

To you as well Brian. Also with sincerity. :-)
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 8:13 PM Edamon50 writes:

As for RB's historical point

As for the point RB was making about the election of Reagan, I think it has some serious merit. While the economy was a huge issue and the Cold War was hot as well, the Embassy hostages kind of put all of the dissatisfaction with Carter into one event. His abandonment of the Shah led to directly to the capture of the Embassy; the rise of the Ayatollah Khomeini put a major source of our oil imports into the hands of a government that saw us "The Great Satan", and the anti-defense attitudes in the Carter administration led to the atrophy of our military capabilites and the "Desert One" debacle.

In that atmosphere Carter would have had a tough fight against Bush, Dole, or Reagan in the general election. The people didn't just want change, they were demanding it becausenit was obvious to everyone that Carter was a failure.

Things are different now, and with the electorate as split as they have been in the last two elections the GOP, like it or not, had to give some thought to getting a candiate that was electible. That may not be what we like to hear, but it is a political reality. How good would it have been for the GOP or conservatism to have had, say Duncan Hunter, on the ballot...only to be crushed in the general election? If that had happened, the GOP would have found itself just where the Democrats did after 1980...locked out of the White House for 12 years.

Then again, "If...but...candy...nuts...Christmas"!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 8:26 PM Pasadena Phil writes:

Flag

You're right. I take back my "vote for Barr is a vote for Obama" comment. I just read through too many of those today and the momentum just carried over.

As to it being easier to stop Obama than McCain, that is easy. McCain has a long history of promoting the very things everyone is afraid Obama will bring onto us and would hamstring Republicans in confronting their own party's leader. McCain would pounce on that advantage and throw amnesty and Cap and Trade at us very early.

Obama, on the other hand, would be confronted by unfettered House Republicans and Dem Blue Dogs who want to get re-elected. Being pragmatic, he might not even try to fight what has been an increasingly fierce losing battle.

Yes, the Dem rhetoric towards McCain is outrageous but no more than the GOP rhetoric towards Obama. This election started almost 3 years ago, yet the opportunity to discuss issues was intentionally crowded out by fear-mongering from the very beginning. We couldn't risk it because the thought of Hillary winning risked the survival of civilization itself. How ridiculous is THAT? The GOP rhetoric is just as outrageous as the Dem rhetoric and has since added race-baiting to fear-mongering.

I don't question your principles but believe you attach far too much importance to the success of the GOP in furthering your interests. McCain is intent on ending all conservative influence in the GOP.

As awful as it may seem to you, you are faced with only two choices, vote for the one-party system or vote against it. If you could stop analyzing the platforms (you couldn't squeeze a stolen ID in the space separating the two) and reduce it what should now be obvious to you. Could the Dems have grown government as big as Bush has? Judge the results, not the rhetoric.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 8:31 PM Pasadena Phil writes:

A Right Brainer

I realize you left already but if you comeback, I agree that change must first come to the electorate's mindset. But that won't happen until we force a change in the public dialogue. The GOP has intentionally and maliciously purged conservative issues out of the discussion. McCain openly boasts of standing up to US! WE are the corruption he is talking about! The only way we can get the GOP's attention again is to refuse to vote for liberals. By supporting conservatives, Dem or Rep, for Congress and voting 3rd party for prez, we are sending a blunt message. The power is in the House where they have to run every 2 years and they want to get re-elected too. It worked in 2006, will work in 2008 and thus we will be ready for 2010 instead of hoping desperately for a crack in 2012 after laying dormant for four years.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 8:41 PM Edamon50 writes:

Four points for Brian

1) I raised the primaries as an example of an issue that conservatives keep obsessing over, knowing that it can't be changed. Your passion in railing against the way the primaries are set up is fine, but ultimately those are matters resolved in individual states...and the primaries are over now, so going on about them is pointless!

2) You have not read anything that I wrote saying explicitly or implicitly that McCain had earned anyone's vote by winning the primary. It is not my job to tell others how to vote, and I have never tried to. McCain is out there trying to earn votes on the campaign trail and no one is saying that because he won the primary he automatically should get a vote. I DID say that even if we don't like the idea of McCain as nominee he deserves the respect that he did earn by winning the primary fight.

3) You have not seen any words I have written that say that anything is going to be different with McCain, nor have I said that he will suddenly become a conservative. I HAVE said that McCain is McCain, and he is not going to suddenly start trying to please everyone now. McCain will be the same person as a President as he is as a Senator; willfull, a bit stubborn, and more than willing to walk his own path...regardless of what critics have to say about him.

4) Am I to be called insane at my own blog, simply because I don't see the need to continue waging an all out war on John McCain, almost to the ignoring of the shortcomings of one Barack H. Obama? If the Eisntein definition of insanity is true, then wouldn't that make YOU insane for complaining about the primary system months after the primaries have ended? Somehow I don't see disagreements as being a maek of insanity, do you?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:10 PM Edamon50 writes:

Riddle me this Pasadena Phil

What does it matter if McCain or Obama manage to get a vote on cap and trade, if a Democrat comtrolled Congress is doing the voting? If the GOP "leadership" in Congress would not stand up to a President McCain on an issue like this, the we have no need of them anyway; they would have simply proven that they are not serving the electorate, but are committed to Party unity and self preservation. Is that really what we want to continue? But what if the conservatives in the Party did the same thing to McCain that they did to Bush on the Harriet Myers nomination or the immigration plan? Would not that type of stand show McCain what his limits were, and constrain him from veturing too far off the reservation? As for those Blue Dog Democrats, how may of them have stood against the wishes of the Party on any meaningful issue in this Congress? And why do you think that these low ranking Congressmen would suddenly break ranks with their Party leadership to stop legislation their Party supports?

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:12 PM Edamon50 writes:

Finally, Pasadena Phil

Also, I know that the rhetoric is heated; I have been hearing it since the 2006 mid-term elections. But I have to challenge your assertion that somehow the GOP has introduced race-baiting into this election. I have not heard a member of the GOP saying that Obama "doesn't look like the guys on the dollar bills"; or "that he has a funny name, and did I mention he's black"; nor have I seen the McCain ad that took the words of a third party and distorted them so much that they became slurs used to inflame Hispanic voters. But I have seen and heard all of that from the Obama campaing, some of them from the candidates own mouth, and I have heard Obama surrogates claiming that anyone not voting for Obama is motivated by racial bias (hello Claire McCaskill)!

And how exactly am I putting my faith in the GOP to serve my interests? If you checked my archives, you would see that I have long moved away from the notion that the GOP was conservative, or that it could further my interests. What I am is pragmatic enough to know that the GOP at this moment comes closest to representing my political viewpoint. There is a great differnce in the platforms of the two Parties and I would very much like to see the GOP start living up to the platform it espouses. I don't think that constitutes my putting faith in the GOP to further my interests.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:24 PM miss vicky writes:

You guys run deep, interesting. I'm Baaa

Hi Right Brainer, Ya'll were really going at it! I'm just a simple minded political junkie who votes for the person, not so much the Party.
I made the mistake to get involved with the Brian gang, they know who they are. I got beat up pretty bad but I think I came out of it smelling like a rose, Ha! Brian is quick with the insults, which I also experienced and for no good reason. He didn't like my antics??? Disagreeing with the all knowing Brian is risky!
See ya around!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:28 PM Edamon50 writes:

One more thing

Here's onemore thing I would like for the people saying that McCain is just as bad as Obama; follow this link http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWI3MDQyNGIwOTczMTU2Y mI1NjE5OWMxMGJkYTQzZTg=&w=MQ== and tell me how McCain is just as bad on foreign policy as Obama. Does anyone really believe that McCain would pull a stunt like this?

BTW, if the link doesn't work just cut'n'paste it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:29 PM Pasadena Phil writes:

Flag

You are lobbing softballs at me now.

"As for those Blue Dog Democrats, how may of them have stood against the wishes of the Party on any meaningful issue in this Congress?"

When the GOP controlled EVERYTHING, Congress voted to expand the government as never before without a single veto from Bush. Even so, we conservatives rose in outrage to defeat the obnoxious McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill which was the last straw leading to the GOP disaster (conservative victory) of November 2006.

Once the conservative Blue Dogs defeated the faux conservatives, they openly defied party leadership to close ranks with fellow GOP conservatives and we returned to glorious gridlock. They were instrumental in once again defeating McCain's amnesty bill (so much for McCain learning anything from bringing defeat to his party) after the election.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:35 PM Pasadena Phil writes:

Flag

Race-baiting is a very subtle thing. Few people see themselves as being racists. They certainly would never admit it. But to continually refer to Barrack HUSSEIN Obama, call him a Black Muslim Marxist and show picture after picture framing him as being a closeted Al Sharpton is not all that subtle. They can get away with that only because people don't realize they are being manipulated.

If the election were to focus on issues with intelligent and factual discussions, we could get past all of these things quickly. But it is all about fear and emotion and latent psychological manipulation.

You need to turn off your emotions and let your brain do its work. I also suggest abandoning being a Republican. Being an independent gives you a much more constructive angle about what is wrong. You don't have to win elections to further your cause. You just need to be enough of a pain that you are included in the discussion. You are choosing to support a candidate who will not even give you the worst seat in the stadium, but won't even allow you in your own team's stadium! Do you really want to be a member of THAT team?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:36 PM miss vicky writes:

Too hot to handle. Lost cause pause!

The titled printed but can't find my copy?
Guess it will show up after you return. See Ya.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 9:39 PM Pasadena Phil writes:

Congtatulations Flag!

You are now on Vicky's radar. If it gets too bad, come visit at BrianR's orphanage with us SCDS folks or GunnyG's blog. We aren't as far apart as you think and we have fun even disagreeing with each other. (And the places are sprayed for Vicky).
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 10:17 PM philosophocon writes:

Before I forget, because I will,

happy birthday Flag, and many happy returns. 1971 was apparently a very good year because I'm turning 37 in a couple of months myself.

Now, I'll try and answer your question.

Well, I guess I must not be doing a great job promulgating my views, because I'm not terribly concerned about the party itself, I'm all about the policies. Up here party politics is really devoid of ideological warfare on any substantive policy issue, as far as I'm concerned. You want your party to win because that leads to the patronage appointments, perks and benefits from being in power, and so on and so forth. Well, at least if you're on one of the upper rungs of the party ladder.

In that respect, I really can't say that Canada's much different than say a multi-party version of Communist China or the U.S.S.R. My party wins, I benefit personally, and if it doesn't I miss out. Therefore my party must win, regardless. If it doesn't help me win, ideology gets thrown under the bus faster than someone close to Obama. Which is pretty much why I'm here at TH discussing American politics; you still have ideological differences on issues of substance being debated publicly. At home the discussion is over on many things, especially the social issues which are important to me. You either agree publicly or shut up, lest you face charges on hate crimes for an increasing number of issus.

If you think I'm exaggerating, did you know that the provinces now have their own Human Rights Commissions, which they use to do things like harass priests who are guilty of nothing more than stating the Church's position on homosexuality as a sin? Just happened in B.C. Even after the Federal Human Rights Commission dropped the case, the B.C. Commission brought the same priest up on charges, because they found the feds weren't aggressive enough. This isn't partisan hyperbole, it actually happened.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 10:41 PM philosophocon writes:

You're probably thinking, boy,

that was long-winded and didn't really answer my question. What can I say, I'm a victim of my undergrad degree, a B.A. in Philosophy. Please allow me to continue.

I am entirely aware that at the national level the GOP, as represented by the RNC, has been conservative only as a last resort, and probably hated every minute of it. And I beleive that we both agree that, in spite of this, a more conservative GOP is good for America when it happens. I have adopted the positions I have because I believe that they are much more likely to lead to the outcome of a more conservative GOP.

Or, in the event the GOP does not do so, a political vacuum is created. Nature, abhorring a vacuum, will hopefull see to it that it is filled with a more ideologically conservative party/movement. Cue candidate Crawfish, or another suitable alternative.

My objection to McCain is therefore based on the fact that he very much diminishes conservatism in the Republican Party. Given that the U.S. is still a two-party system, that means conservatives are essentially shut out of the body politic and policy discussions. This is bad for everyone. It really then comes down t liberal (Dem) and liberal light (Repub). Yes, lib light is preferable to lib, but you've already conceded the field. As I previously mentioned, it's no longer a case of do we or don't we on many issues, it's simply a question of how to we do it.

Look at McCain. Yes, his votes on abortion have been pretty good. But it's not a central issue to him. He doesn't talk about it much, hasn't sponsored legislation on it. Even worse on gay marriage; I don't think he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. We both know that right now what's important to him is amnesty and cap and trade. And that he'd be more than likely to throw abortion or gay marriage or even gun control under the bus to get them.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 10:41 PM Keys to the Right writes:

Flagwaver

This has been an issue with me for awhile. A few months back my mom said that she would vote for McCain because he was a war hero and had sacrificed his country. Then I got to thinking, isn't that the same thing as saying that you're voting for Obama because he's black. It's probably not the same thing but it got me to thinking.
This McCain thing has been an issue for me for a long time. I don't like where he has stood on several issues, McCain-Fingold and Immigration for instance, but I do respect him for his service. And the fact that an Obama presidency scares me to death. Everyone on both sides of this issue has brought up some good points, but I'll probably need more time to think about it.
Speaking of Obama, there's a new cartoon about him at my blog.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 10:48 PM philosophocon writes:

Sorry to be taking so much space up

on your blog, but you did ask, and you must know me well enough by now to know the risks involved in doing so.

So to try and sum up, if you have Obama elected, yes, he's an arse, he screws things up. But the debate on so many issues will boil on and be more heated than ever. This is good.

If you have McCain elected, well, he agrees with the Dems on a number of seminal issues, the debate is over for all intents and purposes. It becomes a matter of how to implement liberal policies. And, as mentioned, McCain is on the liberal side of the issues most important to him, and will likely jettison some of his conservative ones to further them. Therefore, the fundamental debat on many issues becomes setteled. Personally, this sucks for me because it's a repeat of what's happened here, I've lost my home and now my surrogate home.

Anyway, hope that clears a few things up. Let me know if it doesnt.

Have a good one.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:00 PM BrianR writes:

Yeah, okay, "rightbrainer


You, a 13 year old at the time, know more than I, a 31 year old at the time.

Sure thing, pal.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:08 PM BrianR writes:

Flag


Your point on the primaries. You say it can't be changed, but it certainly can. Those rules are made by the Party, not by any law. So if they want to change them, they can.

What would motivate them to change those rules? The loss of support from conservatives, which is exactly my point.


You wrote "I HAVE said that McCain is McCain", and I fully agree, which is exactly why I won't be voting for him.

You wrote "Am I to be called insane at my own blog".....

Exactly where did I write anything like that at all?

You know, Flag, this is very similar to the comment you made at my blog in which you claimed that I had disparaged Palin's qualifications, when in fact I have never done anything of the kind.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:27 PM philosophocon writes:

Say, Brian, Right Brainer,

are you guys p*ssing for distance or accuracy?

Sorry Flag, couldn't resist.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:30 PM BrianR writes:

Accuracy, Philosoph


Accuracy and clarity are always my two main objectives.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, September, 19, 2008 11:50 PM BrianR writes:

Flag!


It just occurred to me!


Are you referring to the Einstein quote?

Man, you need to do something about your sensitivity issues.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 9:31 AM Edamon50 writes:

Brian

You wrote this: "To you, things will be different this time, with McCain.

To which I have yet another quote:

"Insanity is repeating the same action while expecting a different result" -- Albert Einstein"

I am not being overly sensitive, since the only way to take that is to mean that I am insane for believing that things are going to "be different" with McCain...which I never said, BTW.

If you don't want me to react to thigs like this, don't post them in the first place, cause from where I sit it can only have one meaning.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 9:44 AM Edamon50 writes:

Pasadena Phil

On the "Blue Dogs": I don't know about all those other Blue Dogs out there, but I know ours from NC, Heath Shuler, has not been caucusing with the GOP. He is a Democrat, and when push comes to shove he is going to stick with his Party on major issues. I have yet to see any of these Blue Dogs take a stand against the wishes of the Party leaders, because they are in no political position to do so. The idea of the Blue Dogs voting with the GOP seems to be more wishful thinking than anything else.

On race baiting: First of all, both Parties have for years used emotion to troll for votes. In a 30 second tv or radio spot there is not time for substance, only a quick grab of the attention and the emotions. As for the race aspect, it has not been the GOP injecting race into the campaign as much as the Democrats. It has been the Obama campaing and its surrogates that have made every attack on him into a racial assault; it is his campaign that made Hussein into a dirty word, and it was the nature of their demanding that people not use his given name that made people use it; it is the Obama campaign that has painted any decision not to vote for The One as based on latent racism, and not possibly be based on any policy disagreements. What you're saying reminds me of a gag on "The Tom Joyner Morning Show" where the crew picks up little insignificant words or phrases and turns them into "hidden racism". If you want to see racism everywhere you look in this campaign, feel free; but I am not going to allow you to say that it is the GOP that is race baiting, when it is obvious that the Democrats are the ones actually doing it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 9:53 AM Edamon50 writes:

Finally Pasadena Phil

The idea that you don't need to win elections to further your cause is true, as far as it goes...but winning sure makes it easier. The people or groups that have a real impact on policy, etc are those that have some power in the system, or a strong foothold; the people who are just a noisy minority may get a bone thrown to them from time to time, but are usually only going to be treated as an annoyance.

Also, who says who I am supporting here? I have not said I was a McCain supporter, but if I was I would not apprecate your attitude. The people who have decided to support McCain have done so for reasons that are important to them and you don't get to call that into question. If you don't like McCain, great...but don't start attacking others because they do. As for me, I think you have jumped to your conclusion about my stand not based on anything I have said, but beacuse I don't share your abject disdain for all things McCain. Now you tell me, who is being ruled by their emotions here?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 9:59 AM Edamon50 writes:

KTR & Philosph

KTR: Take your time and make up your own mind about the election. Don't let the opinions of others sway you; weigh all the facts and make your decision based on that. That's the ony way to do it!

Philosph: I understand your POV, but I don't think things will change that radically here in America. Even if McCain is elected, I don't think the conservative voices within the GOP will kowtow to him just for the sake of Party unity. They opposed Bush on the things they felt were important, so why would they not oppose McCain if they think he is going the wrong direction?

And I have heard about the HRC's up there; didn't they prosecute Mark Steyn up there for "hate speech" as well?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 10:35 AM BrianR writes:

Flag


Okay, I get it, and my apologies.

Sooooo many of the McCain "hold your nosers" take the position that McCain's going to somehow be different that it's hard to keep track of the very few who don't.

However, you've misinterpreted Einstein's quote also, FYI. Essentially he was restating Santayana.

The bottom line being: disregard the historical precedent at your own peril.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 1:38 PM beltway girl writes:

flag, i think it's great you came to

this decision. i know you've been stewing over this point for a long time, and i'm glad you've gotten on top of it.

not to be a gloomy gussie, but the economic panic may be driving us towards an inevitable obama victory, anyway. with the mass of these financial catastrophes virtually on the heels of the election, i don't see how poor mccain pulls this off. even if he shines like a star at the debates, too many will think "bad economy, good democrat!" and become obama drift... the only thing that makes him even competitive now is his bipartisanship...

i'm voting for mccain, in spite of this. but with a collapsing wall street on the horizon, propped up by government money pumping, i feel it is probably a lost cause, too.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 1:41 PM Virginia Patriot writes:

Flag

Good essay.

Not voting for amnesty.

Ever.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 8:10 PM Goshawk writes:

Flag

You and I think alike on the subject. As far as I'm concerned, my principles lay in what's best for the Nation. And when I see this this Marxist Obama with his entire background dedicated to communism. I will do all I can to stop him and the Liberal/Socialist from taking over the government. That includes voting for McCain/Palin.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 20, 2008 9:33 PM Peppermint2 writes:

Flagwaver

I commend you on your very well written article without any bias.

It's refreshing to read what you have written and your approach to the issue of this election.

I'm in agreement with all you state, the primaries are over and now we have to play with the cards dealt to us. We can't change that and it's useless to keep going over it ad nauseum.

For myself, I decided to vote McCain after examining both candidates' policies. I am a registered independent so I'm not interested in party affiliations or what happens to one party over the other.

However, I am interested in what I consider is best for the country. Right now, even though I don't agree with McCain either on many things, I disagree more with the policies of Obama.

And, I don't like being called names like brain dead nose holder or a race baiter because I am not voting for Obama. If Michael Steele or Thomas Sowell were running for President I would be delighted to vote for either one of them since their policies would be more in agreement with how I look at the issues.

Also I do not believe in telling others who they should vote for either. Each person has the right to make their own choice without being demeaned or harassed about it no matter how much I may disagree with them.

This has been a very difficult election cycle and many people are in a quandary about what to do. I see no purpose served in divisive and deriding tactics regarding how to cast one's vote.

Once again, thanks for a really thoughtful and well written article where you have nailed the core issue.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 12:08 PM Edamon50 writes:

Beltway girl, Peppermint2, Goshawk, VPat

Beltway girl: If McCain were smart, he'd hang this right around the necks of the Democrats and link Obama to it. This all started with the collapse of Fannie and Freddie, and we know that Freddie & Fannie were being run into the ground by prominent Democrats who made a pretty penny from their dealings. We also know that there were some prominent Democrats in Congress who were more than willing to take significant contributions from F&F, most notably Sen. Obama. We further know that a couple of those people are playing prominent roles in the Obama campaign. With all of that information, McCain cold easily hang this on Obama and the Democrats, while simultaneously pointing out that he was calling for reform at F&F for years, and that the Congress and Bush administratiin ignored him on it; that would allow him to distance himself from Bush on this, and point out that the Democrats are neck deep in this mess.

Peppermint2: Thanks a million for the post, you seem to really get where I'm coming from! For me it's not what's best for the GOP or about protecting the conservative influence in the Party; it is all about what is best for the Nation. And fighting battles that have already been lost simply diverts us from taking a clear-eyed look at what is important in this election cycle.

Goshawk: I agree that we are essentially on the same page here. For me the thing about conservatism that makes it special is that it always seeks the best interest of the Nation first, not the fortunes of any Party. That means that we sometimes have to make decisions that we may not like, but we make them because we want to insure that both the immediate and the long term future of the Nation is secure...not the narrow interests of any political Party.

Va. Pat: I understand your position and respect your decision. And I appreciate your taking the time to respond.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 12:45 PM Pasadena Phil writes:

Flagwaver

You see no evidence that Blue Dogs are acting independently from their leadership? Did the amnesty bill pass after November 2006? Did "girl power" bring about the obnoxious Pelosi agenda everyone was afraid of?

And that Schuler guy? Is that the author of the enormously popular SAVE Act to secure the borders first? Read 'em and weep Flag:

clerk.house.gov/110/lrc/pd/petitions/Dis5.htm

You really are fact-challenged. Voting Republican uber alles is not a plan. If you have principles you are willing to fight for, the only principle I can detect is that Republicans are always better than Democrats. That is not a principle, it is a pathology.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 2:50 PM Purplegimp writes:

Flagwaver

You said it ever so much better than I did.
Concise and to the point.

Thank you
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 3:38 PM Dogged writes:

Flagwaver

Wonderful post, well thought out and written. You make great points and you're right, now is the time to put the primaries behind us and move on to elect a president that will protect our country first. McCain will do just that he has always put country first. I don't see him changing from that now. He may not be as conservative as we would like. He is the most conservative running with a good chance to win.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 7:34 PM TNconservative writes:

Having Standards Is A Lost Cause?

You know I think that pretty much sums up what we have been hearing from the GOP for quite a while now.

For over a year all that was in the news was that it was going to be Rudy Guiliani against Hillary Clinton, and all of the people with standards had better hold their nose and vote GOP.

I like you, cannot support Obama as he is. However I am consistance, and I don't wish to have a double standard.

People are honest about how horrible Obama would be, but they are not honest about how horrible McCain would be.

McCain has historically shown that he is more than willing to betray conservatives, then take their support for granted.

McCain thinks that the right to life issues, should be state issues, but he thinks that terrorists should be given Geneva convention rights and American rights. Apparently he cares more about terrorists.

The McCain nose holders have allowed their hatred for Obama to cloud their judgement.

McCain/Fiengold could just be the very begining.

And look at who you will team up with to bring about a McCain presidency. Flaming liberal Hillary Clinton supporters.

And then watch what happens in 2012, Hillary Clinton would come back to easily destroy McCain as he could never win without the support of her supporters who would then be supporting her.

So that is what you will get from McCain. 4 years of a president who will reach across the aisle with a liberal democrat congress and make strong, powerful and long lasting, extremely liberal changes to our nation, all in the name of conservatism. Then after those 4 years are over you will get 4 to 8 years of Hillary Clinton.

Talk about future generations? A 5 year old kid today would be 13 to 17 before this liberal madness MIGHT be over with, if ever.

I certainly understand someone having fear over this, and not being happy about where America is right now, but please lets be honest about both Obama and McCain.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 7:50 PM Conservabear writes:

flagwaver,

I look at it this way if I were a Democrat I would still be voting for McCain. As much as I may disagree with him I still think he would NOT rollover for ideologies and governments seeking to destroy this country. Now if we could only get him to secure the borders and open ANWR.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 7:53 PM TNconservative writes:

The Valueless McCain Vote.

All these people who talk about a third party vote not counting for anything and being a thrown away vote, have you ever thought about your own "held nose" vote for McCain?

All a McCain vote will ultimately say is either that you are a firm and solid McCain supporter who thinks that McCain should be the standard for the GOP,

or

that you will still vote GOP anyways. Regardless.

I just don't see much value in voting that way.

People are saying we got to stop socialism.

Stopping socialism is not my main issue. Sure I don't want it. But if America is to lose it's identity which is laid in those standards, then where is the desire to stop socialism?

When people are waking up and asking, What has happened to my country? And, Is this still the same country I know? The desire to stop socialism slowly fades away in the darkness of the lost standards and lost identity.

When people decide to give up these standards, they are going to lose more than just those standards.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 7:56 PM Redmeat & cigarettes writes:

flagwvr recalibrates..

Many of us have made the same journey. A smart conservative wakes up in the morning takes a sober look at the situation and takes their best step forward, no complaints, no crying, no victimhood.... Just like in your everyday life... Change the things you can, deal with the things you can't. Most importantly, figure out which battle is most important now , not yesterday. I'm looking forward to fighting with McCain for the next 4 years. Better than fighting with our 1st socialist president. Welcome to the correct battlefield flagwaver.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 8:09 PM Edamon50 writes:

Yeah Pasadena Phil

Heath Shuler did sponsor the SAVE Act, in November 2007, about 5 months after the immigration debate was effectively settled with the cloture vote of the last comprehensive immigration bill! Aslo, Shuler wasn't able to get the needed 218 signatures on his discharge petition to get it to the floor for a vote, so how effective was he as a leader on the issue? And if he were so conservative in the first place, then why did he and the other Blue Dogs vote for San Fran Nan for the Speaker's position in the first place? So let me recap: The Blue Dogs vote for Pelosi as Speaker, Shuler introduces a bill that he never gets to the floor for a vote, then blames it on John McCain(?)...and I am to be impressed with the actions of the Blue Dogs?

PUH-LEEZE!!!

I may be a lot of things, but stupid ain't one of them, and I am surely not so naive as to believe that any freshman Congressmen are going to stand against their Party leadership...the very Party leadership they voted into power...in any substantial way. You can believe that if you want, but I can't see it!

As for my principles, I have never said that I vote for the GOP at all costs, but I will say this: whining and moaning abut the outcome of the primaries is waste of time and effort, and accomplishes nothing. And I fail to see where it is some great triumph of principle to effectively hand the leadership of this nation to someone we know is to the left of Al Gore simply because we are in a snit that the GOP didn't hand us the candidate we wanted.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 8:33 PM Edamon50 writes:

TNConservative

Look, I'm not telling anyone what to do, how to vote, or what their standards should be. I am saying that once a fight is over, it's over and time to fight the NEXT fight...not the last one. I also think that a lot of the anger at McCain is based not on any policies that he supports or opposes, but on a desire by many conservatives to protect the position of influence conservatives have had in the GOP. They are not so much opposed to McCain as they are the idea that a McCain win would give rise to a more moderate GOP. Well guess what, that has already happened! Look at the last 2 GOP Presidents, and the ones directly preceding Reagan: Nixon, Ford, Bush the Elder, and Bush the Younger...not a real conservative among them!

You also say that McCain has or would "betray" conservatives, but I ask this: How? McCain has never claimed to be a conservative and has never appealed directly to them for support, so how can he betray a constituency that he had in the first place? The you say that McCain favors giving terrorist suspects GC rights and the same rights as citizens; that's a new one on me. I have heard McCain say that he does not believe in torture, and I have seen him rail against US tactics that he (and others) consider to be torture. But on that I can give him the benefit of the doubt, because when a man goes through 5 years of torture he is not going to want to see that nflicted on anyone else.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 8:52 PM Edamon50 writes:

TNconservative 2

You say:"All a McCain vote will ultimately say is either that you are a firm and solid McCain supporter who thinks that McCain should be the standard for the GOP,or that you will still vote GOP anyways. Regardless.I just don't see much value in voting that way."

We all know that there are people who vote the Party over the candidate, and I can see your point on that being a valuless vote since it doesn't have to be earned. But I refuse to accept the premise that those who vote for McCain because they support him are throwing their votes away. Anyone making the decision to vote for McCain is doing so based on issues that matter to them, and they are doing it in the belief that McCain best represents their positions in this election. You may not agree with them, but you do not have the right to tell them that they are wrong for making their own decision about this. You have made yours, so allow others to make their without the "more conservative than thou" attitude; you do not have a monopoly on conservative values just because you choose not to support McCain.

Also, what exactly does this mean:"Stopping socialism is not my main issue. Sure I don't want it. But if America is to lose it's identity which is laid in those standards, then where is the desire to stop socialism?" Are you implying that those who see a vote against Obama as a vote to stop the creeping socialism we see in the nation from becoming overt are abandoning principle? Or are you trying to feed us the lame "McCain is a socialist" line? I can't tell, but you can rest assured that I strongly disagree with both sentiments.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 9:02 PM Edamon50 writes:

Thanks for posting!

Purplegimp: Thanks for the kind words;I do my best to make my points clearly.

Dogged: I have my problems with McCain, but I do think that he genuinely cares about the Nation first...before Party, ideology, or personal ambition.

Conservabear: Maybe Palin can work on him as it regards ANWAR. She can show him what it would really mean to the region, how it coud impact gas/oil prices, and convince him that no Northern Eden will be destroyed by drilling there. Heck, it's her state and I think she knows it better than anyone else in the race.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 9:06 PM TNconservative writes:

flagwaver,

McCain betrayed conservatives with McCain/Fiengold, and just about every time he has shown any leadership.

McCain does claim to be a conservative. Maybe not as much as McCain supporters say he is, but he still claims it.

For example, his claim that he will appoint conservative justices to the supreme court.

This he would betray conservatives on again. And he would nominate a maverick.

Any thinking person who understands the process knows that the 5th conservative would be fought by democrat congress.

So what the people who voted for him will get is a liberal justice. Probably a really really young one too.

But thats ok, atleast that justice will probably support McCain/Fiengold.

That is how McCain will betray conservatives. Well just one of many possible ways.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, September, 21, 2008 9:21 PM TNconservative writes:

Flagwaver 2,

It is all of these nose holders who are saying that a third party vote is a wasted vote.

Right here on this thread.

So now I point out that their vote for McCain is a wasted vote.

So basically its ok for them to say that a third party vote is wasted but its not ok for me to say that a McCain vote is wasted.

As far as my comment about socialism. You were closer to my point the first time. My comment is that conservatives who vote are going to more and more care less about voting if the values and standards of America are gone because people have let them go. Sooner or later many conservatives will lose their desire to stop socialism because they will be so discouraged because of all of their issues which have been thrown under the bus.

For example someone against illegal immigration might care a lot about stopping socialism, but as his issues are thrown under the bus more and more and as he witnesses his standards and values being thrown out by the people who are supposed to be on his side, he might not be able to vote for such politicans even if it is a matter of saving America from socialism.

My point is that throwing out issues that obviously matter a lot to people then assume that they will be forced to vote for you anyways is not a winning stradegy.

Thats all the point was.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 12:05 AM Peppermint2 writes:

Flag

"McCain has never claimed to be a conservative and has never appealed directly to them for support, so how can he betray a constituency that he had in the first place?"

What you stated in the above sentence is exactly correct. McCain has never claimed to be a conservative. McCain does things his own way, has stated that many times.

The GOP has not been a conservative party in a long time. Not even Ronald Reagan was a perfect conservative. After all he granted amnesty to many illegals during his tenure. That would not be considered a "conservative" principle.

That is why I have no affiliation for either party. Being an Independent, I have to vote on issues, not personalities or ideology.

This is not a perfect world. Therefore the likelihood of there ever being a perfect "conservative" candidate seems very unlikely.

Also it appears that most people in this country fall somewhere in the middle, not hard to the right, not hard to the left. I guess I might say that most people are pragmatic and know that politics, like life, will never be a perfect venture.





EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 7:50 AM Edamon50 writes:

TNconservative

Now you claim that McCain has betrayed conservatives, citing McCain-Feingold, but you ignore the point I am making: McCain could only betray the conservative base if he ever claimed he was a conservative...and he never has. A big reason that so many conservatives dislike McCain is because he has never been a conservative, as they expect of the members of the GOP!

You also give me conjecture about POSSIBLE court nominations, which you have no idea about! The idea that McCain would nominate liberals to the court because the Congress would resist a conservative is almost laughable. If there is one thing that we can say about McCain is that, whether we agree with him or not, he is no liar; he will tell you what he thinks, and he will try his best to follow through on what he says. So I'll take him at his word on this issue; if he said he will nominate conservative justices, I believe he will. And if the Congress opposes them (which they will on principle), how is that a poor reflection on him?

Finally, if conservative voters start dropping out of the process because of their political frustrations, then that is a reflection on them. If they want more conservative candidates, then get out and work for them; if they want to change the Party it cannot be done by getting in a huff and sitting out the electoral process. That sounds to me like a child wanting to take their ball and go home because he doesn't get to pick the teams!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 7:57 AM Edamon50 writes:

Peppermint2

I don't usually do this, but a Right Brainer has a post at his blog about this very thing. He posits that most of the American electorate is either center right or center left, but if the GOP is going to grow and the conservative movement as well, we have to reach out to the center and bring them into the fold. But I don't see how we can accomplish that when the very mention of John McCain among some conservatives, or the possibility that some conservatives will actually vote for him, turns a part of the conservative community into firebreathers! How can we build a stronger conservative movement, when we attack one another for the personal political decisions we make.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 11:52 AM A Right Brainer writes:

I'm Back

PasPhil

I think we agree in princible not methodology. Brian pointed to the Regan revolution and the Contract with America as the pricnible points in his argument. Yet here we are a decades later having the same discussion.

Flag pointed out rightly so that those same points prove my stance as well. yes we elected conservatives... what happened? they forsook us. So if your message works, what's to prevent them from forsaking us again? Nothing. Not as long as the electorate remains center right.

You have a good point about the public discourse, one that I will cede to you in this respect: the discourse does need to change. My contention remains that a grass roots effort to shift the electorate will be more effective than an effort to "send a message". the message sent is meaningless if it does not bear the weight of the majority electorate.

Further, I think the "send a mesage" tactic treats the symptom not the disease.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 12:30 PM Peppermint2 writes:

Flag

I will visit Right Brain's site and read his article. I suppose some of us are thinking the same thing.

I agree people in the center need to be pulled in to the more conservative side of the political sphere in order to defeat the liberal/socialist agenda. How else are we going to build America back from where it came? We certainly can't do that within the democrat party for one thing. The only voice a conservative leaning individual has had is within the GOP, which still has some conservative politicians.

"How can we build a stronger conservative movement, when we attack one another for the personal political decisions we make. "

That's a good question, Flag, and I don't have an answer for that one. Personally, I don't like attacks, name calling, and condescension over how someone else decides to vote. I've seen a lot of it and it is quite unattractive to put it mildly.

You wrote a most refreshing article without any vitriol, yet I have seen you attacked on your own blog being told you are insane, fact challenged, and have a pathology. This saddens me to say the least.

These kinds of tactics are so unappealing that those doing it lose all credibility with me. It's beyond my comprehension how that kind of dialogue could advance any type of real conversation. Once the name calling starts, the conversation is over for me. It is not something with which I want to be involved.





EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 2:42 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Flag

For some reason imissed your plug of my article.

Thanks!

I wish i had the answer to your question. I think I do, but the mechanics of are difficult to say the least, particularly with in fighting amongst our own.

The thought occurs to me that this conversation, about how to move the elctorate could easily be had on either extreme of the political spectrum. Somewhere the extreme left is advocating the movement of the center majority to the left. Do we have a response? Can we, as consevatives, offer anything in the way of resistance?

When we fight amongst ourselves, are we any better than they?

I don't know, I hope so, I would like to think that conservativism is the answer to many of the problems our govenrment and our nation faces, it has certainly guide my own life well.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 7:19 PM Edamon50 writes:

Peppermint2 & RB

Peppermint: I generally don't get bothered by any personal attacks, especially from BrianR. We have been around and around on several different topics and the debates can get a bit heated. What is counterproductive is when we conservatives go all out after one another for making decisons we don't like, and calling names because someone has an idea that we don't agree with. That is what I have been witnessing at TH and it is partially why I wote my post to begin with. I knew my stance would not be the most popular, but I never knew that my sayng that McCain isn't all bad, and certainly isn't as bad as Obama would get things poppin' like this!

Right Brainer: We have to have debates on our side, but we all have to realize that the issues that we see as most important are not necessarily the same. Some people see national security as paramount; others see immigration as important; some are big social conservatives, and some are more concerned with economic issues. We all make our electoral choices based on those issues that matter most to us, and it is a shame when we take it upon ourselves to tell others that their choices are wrong, or that they are less than "true" conservatives simply because they disagree with us. If we can't keep from attacking each other, we surely can't sell a conservative message to anyone else.

As for the plug, de nada. It was a good post and I thought it could open some eyes and spark some ideas on what the conservative movement needs to do to gain new converts.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 7:29 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Flag

I learned something during this debate on your blog.

That i can just as easily fall into the trap of wasted effort as anyone else. Doh!

Its good to debate amongst ourselves, that's what America is about, debate and consensus. Its not good to argue and name call amongst ourselves however.

I don't know if there is any such beast as a true conservative, although I took a liberal test once and scored 100% conservative. You should have seen the look on the college kids who were giving the test out at their registration table LOL!

In fact this debate has inspired me to begin a series on conservative principles and defending them in the culture war.

Keep the faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 7:53 PM bob's my uncle writes:

Dear flagwaver

I am a few days late on getting to your post, but I am glad I'm here nonetheless. You have stated my point of view EXACTLY, and I am thankful to you for putting this up. I have already decided to vote for McCain, but I also live in a state (Texas) that is likely to go for him, anyway. By any measure, these are perilous times. Whatever the election results, I am asking God to keep his hand of protection over us.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 8:13 PM BrianR writes:

Shameless plug



New one up at the Island/Orphanage.


LOL, Flag. I noticed you didn't even bother responding to my last post, so what can I say?

This is a billboard post.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 8:30 PM Edamon50 writes:

Brian, you get a special response!

Take no offense, it's just like having guests at your house...the regulars get treated like family, while newer visitors get the attention!

Besides, I never thought you were actually calling me crazy, just pointing out how that could be understood as calling me insane...which I don't think I am...YET!

This issue of McCain is one that we can agree to disagree on, as we have on other issues. I am still not in love with McCain, but Obama bothers me so much, and the prospect of the One with a Democratic majority in the Congress sends more chills down my spine than the thought of what a McCain win would do to the GOP. The Party can still be saved, but what of the Nation if we get 4 or even 8 years of Obama and his Pals running the Nation?

And I will be hitting the scene at the Island as soon as I get finished conversing with the other guests.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 8:35 PM Edamon50 writes:

Bob & RB

Bob: Thanks for the visit and glad I could be of some help to you. there have been many times that other bloggers have articulated eaxctly what I wanted to say as well.

RB: Leave me a post here when you get that up, I would really be interested in reading your ideas.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 8:45 PM TNconservative writes:

Flagwaver, McCain claims conservativism.

What you are saying is incorrect.

Here is something as proof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edUuhfcJPzg

McCain telling the people that he is a proud conservative.

I mean, if McCain isn't a conservative, then why in the world would conservative states vote for him?

I'm sorry but thats an argument that makes no sense.

Yes we think that McCain is a liberal, but he does claim to be conservative. You said that he doesn't, but as my link shows, you were wrong, and McCain does indeed claim to be a proud conservative.

You can say what you want about us who don't want to vote for something that we don't want. Thats fine, you can think whatever you want.

Someone doesn't have to be perfect for me to vote for them. I voted for President Bush. But I do have standards which I think are not too much to ask for, and I don't want to vote for someone who says that they are.

If you are content with voting for someone who says that standards are too much to ask for then thats your right.



EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, September, 22, 2008 9:26 PM Edamon50 writes:

TNconservative

I guess you really showed me, huh? A YouTube vid of McCain saying he's a conservative...as if every Republican on the stump doesn't claim to be just that! Look, McCain has spent his career as a conservative on some issues and a moderate on others, and his record clearly reflects it.

As for the notion that the votes of "conservative states" somehow makes you a conservative, the examples of Nixon, Bush-41, and Bush-43 dispel that idea. All of them carried "conservative states", and there's not a rock-ribbed conservative among the lot of them!

As for standards, we all choose the standards that we make our individual choices by. But I resent your implication that conservatives who are supporting McCain have lowered their standards, or that those conservatives opposing McCain have some lock on the standards that define conservatism. I may or may not vote for McCain, but whatever my decison on election day the choice is mine to make, and I don't need you or anyone else trying to call my principles or standards into question because I don't agree with you. There are only two viable candidates in this presidential election, and those of us who are choosing not to sit out or lodge protest votes are making the best decision with what we have to choose from. So do you think you could climb down from your high horse and allow us the ability to make OUR choices without you trying to disparage them becaue they aren't the decisions/choices you would have made?

We all thank you for that little bit of consideration!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 12:16 AM willibeaux writes:

Flagwaver! Please

permit an ole Korean War Vet (78 years old) to give his perspective on the current election dilemma. I have been married for 58 years. God has blessed me with a wonderful wife, 3 children, 4 grandchildren (2 of them adults) and 7 great grandchildren. Obama with a Dem controlled House and a filibuster proof Senate in 4, maybe 8 years can pass a lot of bad, harmful legislation that will impact my decendents and other young families for what may seem like an eternity. To be perfectly frank, he scares the crap out of me and I don’t scare easily anymore.
No one can convince me that John McCain, with all of his warts, can be as bad or worse for this country than Barack Obama. For openers here is one of Obama’s quotes:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Unless he means the "Peace Corps" (which I doubt or he wouldn't have said NATIONAL SECURITY) he is actually talking about a "Brown Shirts" group.

This is scary. Do I want his hand on the red telephone? Heavens no!!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 12:18 AM Chad writes:

Flagwaver

Like I said, i am not sure that I can fully support McCain at this point but I know I can't support Obama.

Well stated, and I am of the same opinion. An Obama administration appointing judges to the courts scares me more than any McCain Feingold or McCain Kennedy. I don't know that I will vote for him or a third party candidate, but i know i will be weighing that decision until the very moment mark my ballot.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 12:29 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Flag

Im still following the posts here, and I have to say I echo your comments to TNCON.

We can certainly argue about the merits of one position or another, We can argue about the effect they will have. But we should note be arguing that this person or that person should vote a specific way.

The point of reasoned debate is to add fuel to the internal fire of the intelect. To increase options and understanding among people of good conscience, not to disparage those who disagree.

The founders set the example with the federalist and anti federalist papers.

keep the faith!

Ps - First in the series is up now. :-)
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 12:40 PM The Crawfish writes:

I'm with ya, Flag

I'm definitely not a McCainiac, but considering the alternative, I'm pulling the lever for Palin and her running-mate.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 1:08 PM Edamon50 writes:

williebeaux, et al

williebeaux: I share your concerns about a President Obama; I surely don't wnat that neophyte having to make any serious national security decisions, because I think he woefully unprepared to do so.

Chad: we are in the same place, because contrary to what others have assumed, my doubts about McCain have not gone away. I don't particularly believe that "a vote against McCain=a vote for Obama", but this election is too important to me and too close at this point (if the polls can be trusted) for me to cast a protest vote. I did that with Dole, but it was never a real contest anyway, but this time is totally different.

Crawfish: I'm not a McCainiac either, but I cannot support Obama in any way, shape, form, or fashion! This guy is so far left he makes Gavin Newsome look middle of the road!

RB: I will be right over to check your post out!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 3:32 PM willibeaux writes:

Flagwaver! I read

your biography and am honored to tell you that I am a fellow believer in Jesus Christ. I'm trusting God to get us through these troublesome times. God Bless you and your family.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 5:41 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Neocon

More power to you, may your protest vote resound through the nation!

Seriously, by all means vote your conscinece as do we all based upon our understanding of the issues.

Really didn't have much to say Flag, jus wanted to put you into tripple digits on comment counter. :-)

Saw your comments over at Brian's latest posting, nice job!

Keep the Faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, September, 23, 2008 5:43 PM A Right Brainer writes:

So Neocon

How do you imagine that a vote for a third party will bring about the change you so desire?

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, September, 24, 2008 9:19 AM Edamon50 writes:

Williebeaux. et al

Williebeaux: Thank you, and may God Bless you and yours. The motto God, Family, Country is one to live by!

RB: Thanks for the 100th...it was my first time. I knew that feelings on McCain were running deep, but this surpised me (pleasantly).

NEOCONS: Okay, okay...you think that America is Communist, but i think there are some Chinese, Cubans, and Vietnamese living right here in America that would beg to differ...so tone down the rhetoric a bit. And if the Communist manifest has been implemented in the American system, then it probably began in earnest in the 1930s in an effort to combat the Depression. But I could be wrong, because I don't think that the Communist Manifesto has been really incorporated in the US...but that's just me.

I do understand your frustration with the GOP and its tilt to the left, and most conservatives are concerned about that. And if you have decided that you cannot support McCain or Obama that is a very legitimate choice, because you have made it based on what is important to you. But I don't think that voting third party is going to make that big of a difference, b/c third parties usually don't make much of a nation difference. The last time I remember a third party making a difference was when Ross Perot ws able to peel off conservative votes from GHW Bush and helped elect Bill Clinton, and eventually those voters migrated back to the GOP. But if voting for Chuck Baldwin is what youwant to do, I can respect that; now you need to figure out how to respect the decisions of those conservaties who have decided to support McCain.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, September, 24, 2008 11:52 AM A Right Brainer writes:

Its funny...

When you ask these guys (the third party voters) how they imagine it will change the nation, the GOP, the whatever, one way or another, they have one answer. It will send a message. tehy never go beyond that, have you noticed?

We have sent the GOP the message several times, they hear it and forget like kids being told to take out the trash. You have to tell them every week.

Personally, i dont want to have to protest vote every other election for the rest of my life to "send a message". when you remove all the hype, all the angst, frustration etc. You are left with one simple fact that must be overcome. THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE CENTER RIGHT.

The only way to bring permanent positive realignment in this country is to shift the majority to the right. palin and simple, But certainly not easy to do...

Re: disrepecting a vote, the answer is no, i do not disrespect their right or decision. I belive it misguided, but how can you disrepsect the the very thing this nation is buit upo... the people's voice.

Next post is up flag if you care to stop by.

Keep the faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, September, 24, 2008 3:32 PM A Right Brainer writes:

Ok why not...

First: the reason I haven't given you and reasons to support McCain, is becasue you have obviously made your choice, and I respect that.

Second: You argue that voting for a canidate you qualify as "bad for America" will do nothing to get us going back in the right direction. Please explain how voting for a third party canidate will have your desired effect. Furthermore how will that desired effect be sustained when we have already seen that it cannot be.

In my estimation a vote for a third party canidate is in fact a protest vote, it sadens me that you think it an insult, do you think a third party canidate can win? If so how? If not, then explain to me how your vote for a third party canidate is not in protest of the canidates of the major parties.

In regards to liberty versus the voice of the people. I submit to you the following "We teh people...". If you fail to see the link between our voice and our vote, then I am at a loss to help you with that. This country is about majority rules versus minority rights period. Libertarian screeds about liberty do nothing to advance us in a "better direction" they have exactly the opposite effect by relegating your voice to the fringe.

The reason I didn't debate your contentions about "communism/socialism/facsism/ whatever" is because you are correct.

Please tell me again how voting for a third party canidate will change that?

Finally those who have read my comments and my blog know that what I advocate is a massive effort by conservatives to move the ceneter majority of Americans to the right. That is the only thing that will effectively "put us back in the right direction".

Keep the faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, September, 24, 2008 7:41 PM TNconservative writes:

Right Brainer

If all of nose holders would join in voting 3rd party, then the protest could not be ignored.

How could it be ignored? Their voters turn to another candidate because their standards and values have been thrown under the bus. It would have cost the GOP the election. It would be very foolish to ignore.

If people would just stop talking about how something can never be done and how a third party can never win then we actually could have good government.

If the founders of this nation had listened to people who told them that something could never be done, then this nation would still be dependant rather than independant.

Saying that this can't happen and that we can't win is part of the problem in my opinion. It is why we are where we are right now. It is part of the dreaded Apathy so many talk about that is hurtin us. And in my opinion, it is why the GOP will lose and deserves to lose.

If you support a political party while it is going down the wrong road, then guess what they are going to keep on doing.

BTW I wish there was no political parties at all. I think they have been a lot of trouble.

At this point a third party vote or a write in vote is the conservative voice.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, September, 24, 2008 8:10 PM A Right Brainer writes:

TN

If every true blue (or red) conservative voted third party it would send a message that conservatives are unhappy.

First it is inconcievable that every conservative in the nation will do so. It runs against human nature to think so.

While I enjoy the 'what if.." scenario you propse, I whole heartedly disagree with the premise. It is precisely because all conservatives won't vote that way that the message will be obfuscated and ultimately relegated to fringe.

Second, conservatives are unhappy= change in the GOP, in my humble opinion is a false premise.

Why you ask? because it does nothing to adress the center right majority of the nation.

It will highlight that they have lost their base, but reaquiring the base does not assure them of regaining control of any particular office. It only means that they would be in the same position they are now: A party with a minority base and a center right (moderate) populace to court with which to win elections.

I assure you, I hear and understand exactly what you are saying. And I agree that it is possible, where I differ is that it is improbable. It just won't happen.

I am no McCainiac by any stretch of the imagination. this debate has brought me to a point of serious consideration regarding the efficacy of my own vote, however I have that luxury since I live in California and my vote is "wasted" (not implying yours is) anyhow.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, September, 24, 2008 8:10 PM A Right Brainer writes:

TN part II

I may join in your protest vote, or I may not. Haven't really decided yet.

What I do know, is that the ONLY way for conservatives to get more conservative canidates, from any party, is to shift the center more to the right. I think the only way to achive that is a grass roots effort at conservative state representation spearheaded by an all out effort to "reach one, teach one" by us, the voters. We should be out converting moderates to conservatives. And that is exactly what i am comitted to doing in two parts, first hear by encouraging others to do so, and second by seizing every oportunity to educate the people in my sphere of influence and encouraging them to do the same.

Keep the Faith!

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, September, 24, 2008 11:44 PM Edamon50 writes:

NEOCON

Respect does not just mean "to hold in high regard", it also means to refrain from interfering with. And with all due respect, just because you don't like a candidate does not mean that he's the worst of the bunch. We all base our voting on the person that we feel best represents out values, and most look for that within the major Parties. So while Chuck Baldwin may well be the purest ideological conservative in the race, the fact that he is running in a fringe Party makes him basically meaningless to the national election since he is not going to garner enough support to even be a spoiler.

Also, the way you approach the matter alerts me that it is very unlikely that you will ever be able to win one person to the conservative viewpoint, since you have adopted the liberal "slash and burn" politics. You have made yourself willfully blind to the concerns or attitudes of others, and dismiss out of hand anyone that does not see the political world as you do. That type of attitude is not at all helpful, and in fact is counterproductive. If you cannot even respect the choices others make, or keep your nose out of them, how are you going to convince ANYONE that conservatism is a winning ideology?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, September, 25, 2008 12:42 PM A Right Brainer writes:

neocon

I am going to say it one more time so you can listen and hear it. please clear your head, and a deep breath and relax we are all conservatives and want the same thing i.e Conservative representation in our government.

Your advancment of "vote for third party" is a valid choice. I have outlined my reasons for disagreeing with its ability to effect change not its validity, so I'm not sure why you feel pressured to appologize.

Sadly, you haven't adressed any of the points I asked regarding voting for a third party.
1- How will it change anything?
2- How will that change be sustained?
3-How will your list of issues be ULTIMATELY addressed by voting for a third party?

My idea is not only Ideal, it is the only plausable, sustainable method by which to get more conservative representation.

I am not advocating for the GOP at all I am advocating for conservativism, which by the way is what Keep the faith means! Have faith in conservative ideals, that they can win over moderates to our cause.

Conservatives are nothing if not generaly pragmatic, we are not like those on the left, who adopt our stances despite reality in the hopes of some utopian society. We apply our principles to the task at hand and achieve the best possible outcome.

And that is where you and I disagree.

continued...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, September, 25, 2008 12:42 PM A Right Brainer writes:

neocon II

You wish to shun the reality of the problems facing your "plan" and instead dream of an alter-utopian society where conservatives rule.

As a conservative, i cannot and will not set aside my intelect and ability to asses the political landscape and become bogged down in some pipe dream, where a third party vote is anything more that a protest vote, and that somehow magicaly, this will effect the center majority of the electorate that could give a rats backside, about the 2-3% a third party canidate garners.

Instead i choose to aply my time and talents to advocating what i know will work.

You can contiue to spout your talking points or you can engage in open debate. If you make a point that shows the flaw in my reasoning I'll cede it to you. But heretofore you have done nothing but continue your lsit of demands and heighten your agression towards a fellow conservative by questioning my comittment to priciples.

Are we going to have a reasoned debate about ideas or are we going to just yell at each other?

Keep the faith!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, September, 27, 2008 9:18 PM philosophocon writes:

Hi Flag, for a change of pace

my newest post is a cute little story involving my kids and prayer. Drop on by.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive