Source: Huckabee Tops McCain's Veep List

[BuddyLee]

Originally Posted by MMDad

As a conservative who is turned off by religious fundementalism, Huck is a deal breaker. I could never vote for that ticket.

It's not so much that for me, although that is a factor.

It's his fiscal policies.

[otter (Premo)]

Originally Posted by MMDad

As a conservative who is turned off by religious fundementalism, Huck is a deal breaker. I could never vote for that ticket.

Exactly...U.S. be damned, I will not vote. It's a shame that the media has driven people that could help this country underground. The clowns we have running for office nowadays are a travesty.

I see the GOP breaking apart after this election, McCain does not represent the majority of the party, for him to have won the primarys so early is a scary example of a party that can't put its best foot forward.

Both parties have become so watered down with prima donnas wanting their name in lights, good qualified people don't care to have the media vet their every move through life. The azzhats that now represent US in congress are nothing but a bunch of look-at-me-Im-a-(senator, rep, whatever) pompous azzes, that will lie at the drop of a hat and could care less if their lies catch up with them. Eff em all.

[virgovictoria (Premo)]

Originally Posted by otter

Exactly...U.S. be damned, I will not vote. It's a shame that the media has driven people that could help this country underground. The clowns we have running for office nowadays are a travesty.

I see the GOP breaking apart after this election, McCain does not represent the majority of the party, for him to have won the primarys so early is a scary example of a party that can't put its best foot forward.

Both parties have become so watered down with prima donnas wanting their name in lights, good qualified people don't care to have the media vet their every move through life. The azzhats that now represent US in congress are nothing but a bunch of look-at-me-Im-a-(senator, rep, whatever) pompous azzes, that will lie at the drop of a hat and could care less if their lies catch up with them. Eff em all.

I will back you, Mr. Otter, with a It leaves the country in a very vulnerable position to boot.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by otter

Both parties have become so watered down with prima donnas wanting their name in lights, good qualified people don't care to have the media vet their every move through life. The azzhats that now represent US in congress are nothing but a bunch of look-at-me-Im-a-(senator, rep, whatever) pompous azzes, that will lie at the drop of a hat and could care less if their lies catch up with them. Eff em all.

...is certainly nothing new under the sun. The thing is, we the people, still hold ALL of the power. We have this wonderful tool, the internet, to see, for ourselves, just what John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Steny Hoyer or whomever, actually did or did not do completely absent media influence and/or spin.

John McCain is openly hostile to free speech. He can never, ever have my support with a mindset like that. If many of my fellow Americans accept that, they accept it knowing it.

Hillary is part of the Clinton criminal enterprise and it actually looks like Democrats are going to crawl away, finally, from them.

Obama, well, his proposals, so far, are of socialism, so we can't be surprised when he actually tries to have the government run health care and tries to confiscate private property.

So, we, the people, we KNOW. It is up to us. As long as we continue to vote for these kinds of people, we will continue to have what we deserve. It's like the smoking ban; it's clearly unconstitutional and clearly the worst possible way to address the issue and NO ONE stands up and says "I think it was the right thing to do" now that it's done, yet they sure support the people who did it where it counts; at the ballot box.

When there are more politicians espousing better principles of governance, people will respond. Obama proves that. It's just that his supporters ideas of of 'better' scare the hell out of me!

It's a big challenge because a great many people earnestly supported George Bush. They weren't voting against Gore or Kerry, they were voting FOR him. It's a tough thing to face when someone turns out to not have the values and ideas you thought they did. The signs were there, I think. I know I didn't want to believe them.

So, that's the problem I face; accepting that what I see is in fact what it is.

McCain IS hostile to free speech. I can NEVER support a person like that.

Hillary IS part of the most petty abusers of power in quit some time.

Obama IS a socialist.

I like Paul. I like Barr. And it is for the same reason I don't like those other three; their records.

[ImnoMensa]

Originally Posted by puggymom

Yep I knew that would be a for me....thanks!

I dont mean any harm with this question,but if you are a RINO why are you a Republican at all?

Politicians who are RINO's are using the Republican party for their own reasons, but a person who doesnt remain loyal to Conservative values and other tenets of the Republican party may as well be a Democrat. Libertarian, or Greenie. Just because politicians like McCain are Republicans, that doesnt change the basic views of the members of the party. How the hell this country ended up with these three LOADS as Presidential candidates is a mystery to me.

Picking someone to vote for this term is like a game of eenie, meenie, minee, moe. None of them are worth the gas it takes to get to the polls.

Originally Posted by ImnoMensa

I dont mean any harm with this question,but if you are a RINO why are you a Republican at all?

Politicians who are RINO's are using the Republican party for their own reasons, but a person who doesnt remain loyal to Conservative values and other tenets of the Republican party may as well be a Democrat. Libertarian, or Greenie. Just because politicians like McCain are Republicans, that doesnt change the basic views of the members of the party. How the hell this country ended up with these three LOADS as Presidential candidates is a mystery to me.

Picking someone to vote for this term is like a game of eenie, meenie, minee, moe. None of them are worth the gas it takes to get to the polls.

From what I've seen of all three, Clinton and Obama are holding pretty true to what their party stands for, which is why Democrats are willing to vote for them in droves. It's our guy who isn't holding true to his party's values.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

From what I've seen of all three, Clinton and Obama are holding pretty true to what their party stands for,

Which is why I could never support either. They're socialist, they're bad for the country, and a mediocre choice of Republican is better than a great socialist.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by ImnoMensa

I dont mean any harm with this question,but if you are a RINO why are you a Republican at all?

Politicians who are RINO's are using the Republican party for their own reasons, but a person who doesnt remain loyal to Conservative values and other tenets of the Republican party may as well be a Democrat. Libertarian, or Greenie. Just because politicians like McCain are Republicans, that doesnt change the basic views of the members of the party. How the hell this country ended up with these three LOADS as Presidential candidates is a mystery to me.

Picking someone to vote for this term is like a game of eenie, meenie, minee, moe. None of them are worth the gas it takes to get to the polls.

...the RINO term is very misleading. Republicans are the party of big government and big business. Small government, low taxes, small business, those are the province's of conservatism, not Republicanism.

Look at Nixon, Bush 41 and Bush 43. That is what a Republican is.
McCain with his hostility to free speech, his big business boondoggle in the making ode to global warming and the continuation of our nation building, he'll fit right in.


It's just that CINO doesn't 'sing'.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by ImnoMensa

I dont mean any harm with this question,but if you are a RINO why are you a Republican at all?

Easy - it's the party that most closely aligns with your views - or in the case of my cousin in New York, the party that's gonna get you elected regardless of your views. (My cousin is a die-hard RINO - elected UNOPPOSED as Republican, but otherwise hates them).

And it's a consequence of a trend that's unfortunate - because our electoral process is more or less winner take all, it's in a candidate's best interest to align with the two biggest parties, no matter who they are - because once you get 51%, you win. See, in some parts of the world, seats can be divided based on a proportion of the vote - so you can ACTUALLY get a seat somewhere based on your proportion of the vote. You can BE a Green Party member, and still sit in parliament or the equivalent of Congress. Here, you don't stand a chance, really, unless you build a huge constituency in one area - or capitalize on voter discontent - or manage to mount a campaign against a party candidate whose opponent in the other big party isn't making an appearance. Otherwise, you'd be better off carting your Green Party ideas to the party that's gonna get you in.

[danjuandemarco]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...the RINO term is very misleading. Republicans are the party of big government and big business. Small government, low taxes, small business, those are the province's of conservatism, not Republicanism.

Look at Nixon, Bush 41 and Bush 43. That is what a Republican is.
McCain with his hostility to free speech, his big business boondoggle in the making ode to global warming and the continuation of our nation building, he'll fit right in.


It's just that CINO doesn't 'sing'.

Republicans have historically been opposed to big government. The three Republicans you listed are the worst examples you could possibly have picked. Barry Goldwater, Fred Thompson, and even Ronald Reagan--Those are much more like the core of what Republicanism is meant to be. Politicians in general tend to become in favor of big government after they realize that's what gets them the votes, regardless of party. And in Reagan's case, he had to pass big government policies to get the Democratic house to pass that which he actually wanted to pass. Politics is a messed up world.

Also, I keep hearing about this "McCain is against free speech," yet I've never seen any evidence to support this.