Wednesday, January 30, 2008

It's the Record Stupid

Just need to re-iterate, before the super Tuesday event, that I will absolutely never cast a vote for that despicable Quisling McCain.

If he wins the primary, he has a pathetic chance to be president, after the MSM instantly throws the blade switch in their newsrooms from 'Mac is Back', to 'Stab Mac in the Back'. Even if he miraculously takes the general election, nobody will be able to point to this disaster, then point to me and say... 'See what you republicans did to the country?' As if I played a role in this choice; which I, most assuredly, will not.

If you set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing.

- Margaret Thatcher

I am already sick of explaining to morons that consistently refuse to listen, that most of the egregious complaints against George Bush are a result of his liberal domestic positions, his capitulation to media pressure, his concensus driven lack of spine and his general abandonment of conservative fiscal principles.

There are still people in my party who believe in consensus politics. I regard them as Quislings, as traitors... I mean it.

To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.

- Margaret Thatcher

McCain would be another Bush presidency without the tax cuts, without the conservative judicial appointments, without the terrorist water boarding policy. Additionally we would enjoy a complete abandonment of border security, presidential capitulation to this absurd global warming hoax and on and on and on... Don't tell me that he has actually changed his positions on these issues. The man is an outright liar.

I was talking to my friend Steve, another conservative and Romney supporter. Unlike me, if Mac takes the primaries, he will not write in his candidate on the general ballot. He will vote democrat. This seemed a bit extreme to be. He did made a compelling argument, though. Knowing that there is only a rancid choice between McCain and Democrat-X, you put the hand of the real liberal on the handle of the flushing toilet. This way, as the country is swirling in the bowl, the appropriate blame goes to the right party. A McCain presidency is slow poison to the GOP, moving Reagan conservatism towards destruction.

All I can say is that next Tuesday's results are more important than the general election. It better be a good one.

If you want to cut your own throat, don't come to me for a bandage.
- Margaret Thatcher

You tell them Maggie. When I go to vote for a woman president, I only have eyes for someone like you. By the way, Mitt got the honorable Thatcher thumbs up.


Uber said...

Well stated.

Last night in a post titled "Do We All Become McCainiacs Now?" over at Blogs for Victory (formerly known as Blogs for Bush), I find the following in form of reply.

"On Election Day, I’ll count one solemn duty as superseding all others: voting for the name across from Hillary’s.

I’ll throw up a little in my mouth if that name is “John McCain.”"

On its head, that is a pretty humorous, albeit wry, assessment.

First the fist time in my life, for reasons you've described, I hope to God everyone just stays home if it comes to the above choice.

At least then, there might be hope again in another four years!

Insolublog said...

It's a Buddhist style position, Uber. If we must suffer, in order to learn from the suffering, I do not want my name and vote to be associated with that suffering; I already know for a fact that putting my hand on the hot stove of liberal concensus will BURN my skin.

RT said...

Well said, and agreed. I cannot vote for McCain. I made that decision after much thought. He just doesn't set right with me.

Anonymous said...

Bill Quick has mentioned the idea of writing in Fred Thompson so as to leave no doubt about why your vote was not cast for McCain.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the philosophy of taking a big step backwards in order to go forward. Continuing a slow decay is the worst option. I compare it to the difference between throwing a frog in cold water and boiling it, versus throwing the frog in hot water.

We can all slowly boil to death, unaware of the danger until it is too late, or we can face the consequences of poor choices.

I refuse to follow a "anyone but Hillary" mentality, and I will not concede to the fear mongering that the country will die as a result of having a terrible President.

Anyone who says as much is either being deliberately deceptive, or fails to understand the concept of a republic and separation of powers.

We will survive a Clinton 2.0 Presidency, and will bounce back stronger. We will only slip unnoticably into further decay with a McCain Presidency.

Fire hot. Get burned and learn the valuable lesson.

Insolublog said...

RT – Thanks. I hope it does not come to that.

Anon- I said I would either write Mitt or Fred in on a previous post. I will write Mitt, if it comes to that. Hopefully, I can check his name on the general ballot.

FIAR - I have been taking the 'lesser of two evils' position for so long, I am finally convinced that the strategy is not working.

If it were working, than there would have been slow progress towards doing the right thing, evident in public opinion. Instead, what we have seen, is slow progress toward decay and capitulation on ethics, morals, education, spending, foreign policy and national security.

The frog analogy is apropos. 'Lesser of two evils' means we are not even treading water. We are still sinking. The country may need some of the ugliest wake-up medicine out there.

Wyatt Earp said...

Brilliant as always, sir!

John Salmon said...

If you don't like McCain because he's not "conservative enough"-as little as that description matches Mac's record-that's your prerogative. But to prefer Romney, with HIS record, is hard to figure. Sure, he's now running as a conservative, but he hardly governed as one. You'd be hard-pressed to find an important issue-abortion, immigration, taxes, and more, where he hasn't decided to move right. It's all marketing. Mitt's a businessman to the last.

Mitt's not running against McCain, he's running against his own past.

Insolublog said...

If you actually read it, my post was not about comparing Mitt Romney to John McCain for conservative credentials. It is about John McCain's numerous decades of McCain-(Fill in Liberal) legislative habits.

Mitt operated in this state, suffering through numerous veto overrides, with an overwhelming plurality of Democrats. He also dealt with the stupid anecdote about illegal lawn workers. He has flipped on abortion, but so have I.
Frankly, I do not really care about the gay marriage issue that much.

Compare him to John on:

- Illegal amnesty
- Border security
- Respect for the rule of law
- First amendment rights
- Terrorist interrogation
- Permanent tax cuts