I am sometimes (OK....often) guilty of overstating something for effect. My last article was such an occasion, I think.... I have no intention of voting for Hillary or Obama (although I like Obama.....he strikes me as the most honest liberal that's ever run, even though he's left of nearly everybody in the US!).
All that said......I also won't vote for McCain. McCain is conservative in name, but not in practice. I like his stance on the war and on abortion, but those two things alone are not enough to win me over. The fact that our current President gave him the resounding endorsement of being "a true conservative" certainly doesn't add much credence to his cause, in my opinion. I will vote this election, but I'm not sure for whom. It will likely be 3rd party or a write-in....but I may change my mind between now and then - time will tell.
So it seems that this go around, we are destined to get either the first female, black, or really, really old President.....either way, we will likely see more of the same - a political quagmire in D.C.!!!! I just love politics!
Posts
Does James Contradict Paul?
13 hours ago
7 comments:
Hey, Ellis, as long as you're throwing your vote away, write me in! I'm not elligible, so you would REALLY be making a protest!
Regards,
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Write in for Fred Thompson
Ellis,
Don't vote for me. It's hard to decide, when all the candidates leave so much to be desired. It seems like a vote for any of the above would be throwing away your vote. The only way to justify a vote for McCain, in the opinion of some, is that it would be a vote against Hillary or Obama. Too bad Perot isn't running.
BTW - You probably won't think that's "really, really old" when you get there.
MC
I have a question for Conservatives who claim that there is something honorable about not voting for McCain. Who spend more of their time beating down a fellow Republican, while ignoring the extreme liberal forces that are about to kick their butts completely out of every branch of government.
What is honorable about sitting on your butt at home, refusing to vote – allowing all branches of government to be swarmed by RABIDLY liberal opponents who have vowed to undo everything conservatives have fought to achieve over the past decade?
I hear endless whining and griping from Conservatives – while the extreme liberals, who are bent on reversing every conservative principal – out number us at the polls nearly two to one. Is that principal or is that do conservatives just have a death wish to see our country turn to the extreme left (who has no problem getting their hind ends to the polls)..
What is so conservative about beating down the (soon to be) nominee who supports our troops, instead of the extreme liberals who insult our troops and degrade them every single day in front of the entire world?
By punishing John McCain for not being conservative enough – you are really punishing all conservatives by making absolutely sure they will be governed by radical, rabid liberalism for the next 4 to 8 years.
By stomping your feet and refusing to help, you in turn assure that the laws of the land will have few conservatives in a position of power to stop a runaway liberal train that will further infiltrate our school, explode your tax burden and socialize every part of your life it can.
If you must be dragged to the polls, then don’t bother complaining when our courts are swarmed by the liberals who will put judges in power.
Please think twice before punishing the rest of us conservatives, who may not love McCain, but are smart enough to realize the living nightmare that will ensue, if things continue on the path they are going.
I see nothing conservative about being so focused on the anthill, you completely ignore the volcano that’s about to wipe your entire cause out. That is not principal. That’s political suicide. Will conservatives ever learn?.
Danny Vice
http://thalunatic.blogspot.com
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com
Ellis,
I can appreciate a principled third-party vote, especially in an election where there is very little real difference, or where your vote won't make much of a difference (such as in a state that is clearly red or clearly blue). I have even voted third-party myself on occasion.
My concerns, here, however, are the long-term ramifications of a Obama or Clinton presidency.
Barring a major upset, both the House and the Senate will be controlled by Democrats. Adding a Democratic President to that mix leaves us with little in the way of slowing down any of the leftist agenda. I shudder to think (humanly speaking) of some of the long-term damage that Clinton or Obama could accomplish with both houses rubber stamping their agenda.
Consider the following:
1. So called "hate crime" legislation becomes the law of the land - including those that deal with homosexuality. This would result in the possibility/probability of jail for just preaching the Bible. (This is closer than you think as a version of this has already passed the house (H.R. 1592) and a Senate version (S. 1105) has 44 co-sponsors. The main thing that has kept it from passing currently is a the reality that it cannot get past a Bush veto.
2. There will be six (SIX) Supreme Court justices that will be over 70 years old by the end of the next Presidential term. Even if only one or two of them call it quits or dies (and Stevens is 87), the effect of multiple Clinton or Obama appointees to the court will affect not only issues such as abortion, but many other freedom of religion issues that will continue to have an effect on your grandchildren.
3. With the Dems in control of everything, you can expect D.C. statehood to become a reality. This has been proposed off and on for years. The reason the Dems want it, is that it basically guarantees them two more votes in the Senate - long term.
Anyway, those are just some thoughts. I know there is a long-time until the election, but I urge you to continue thinking about these issues over the next few months.
I appreciate all the comments and concerns here.....this thing has gotten more hits and comments than most of the articles I've written that are actually about something!
All the "doomsday" scenarios that we always like to bring up around election times has never ceased to amaze me. I remember when the Bill Clinton first ran for President. I was sitting in chapel in a conservative Christian college when the VP of the school came up and all but told everybody there to vote for Bush. As a matter of fact, I think he may have actually told the student body that that was their only real choice. After all, a Clinton Presidency would mark the end of the world as we know it. Yet we survived two terms and it really wasn't all that bad.
The concerns about the Supreme Court justices is a legitimate concern; however, I'm pretty certain that the next President (most likely Clinton or Obama) will only serve out one term before getting fired by the American people - hopefully we replace that person with a decent GOP nominee at that time.
While the House and Senate are both controlled by the Dems at this point, expect those dynamics to change somewhat in the next cycle. While I think that the next President might get 2 years with his or her party in control, it's not enough control to make anything happen...in case you haven't noticed, the only way anything gets done in DC is if a major chunk of one party chooses a compromise (particularly in the Senate).
We've been somewhat fortunate with our current President in that he has generally put conservative judges on the bench. However, would you really expect McCain to do the same? I would expect him to be more in line with the first Bush.....
Ellis,
I heard a variation of this the other day and think it applies well.
If your house was on fire and only one person could respond, would you prefer the mediocre fireman or the arsonist?
Frank
Post a Comment