Thompson backs McCain?

Fred Thompson is calling on the party to “close ranks” and support the presumed GOP nominee. A WaPo blog writes:

The endorsement now may help McCain to coalesce the factions of the party around him. Thompson, who represented Tennessee in the Senate for eight years, is thought of well in the South, an area that McCain has not done well in.

Murdoc’s going to go on the record here and say something that is sure to really piss off some Republican and Conservative readers:

The whole “Let Hillary destroy America instead of McCain” position is just Stupid Beyond Words.

Really. And I’m not one often finding himself beyond words. The “I don’t like this game so I’m taking my marbles and going home” theory sounds just like the idiot Liberals that the Republicans and Conservatives spend so much time making fun of.

Sure, McCain isn’t perfect. He isn’t even close. And he’s got some history that isn’t really up to Staunch Conservative standards and he’s got some current positions that I think are just plain wrong. He’s certainly no Reagan, but come on. In case you weren’t paying attention, the Republican sweep to power in Congress on the Reagan principles was a complete and total crock of shit once those guys took office. We haven’t seen any Ronald Reaganing around the GOP since the Gipper was in office, and even then it wasn’t all small government and low taxes.

Don’t get confused and think the good old days were always so good. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Don’t get all up in a lather because John McCain isn’t your personal favorite. You are doing exactly what the Liberals want you to do. They are loving every minute of it. You are making their day, and they’re counting on you to make their next four years.

Right now the options are McCain, Hillary, and Obama. If nothing else, two of those three intend to do everything they can do to lose the war. Immigration issues, tax issues, economic issues, gun issues…how much will any of that really matter in the end if we lose the war?

Freepers are, predictably, bonkers over this. Here are a couple near the top:

“Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! Please tell me it’s a hoax!”

“Fred is obviously not the man I thought he was. I’m sorry that I ever even thought of voting for him. I’m glad he left the race.”

“I swear, it’s like I went to sleep and woke up in Bizarro World.”

But the best (worst) has to be this one:

Sorry, but if this is true I won’t even write in Fred’s name on the ballot. Guess the Hildebeast just won the WH back for Bubba.

That’s delicious. He was going to write in Fred Thompson on the ballot. Now he’s not going to vote at all. And he’s blaming someone else for Hillary winning. Sounds like a Ron Paul loon. At best.

Einstein, that guy ain’t.

They wanted Thompson to get the nomination? They should have won him the nomination. He finished way out of the running against Republicans, folks. John McCain and Mitt Romney WIPED THE FLOOR with him. Where did he finish? Effectively fifth or sixth among Republicans? And you think he should be running in the big election against the Democrats?

Shut up.

Comments

  1. You are, like so many others, missing the point. We’re not taking our marbles and going home. We are merely admitting that conservatives have already lost the election. So we’re trying to make the best of it. How will we make the best of it? Like this: We know that Hilary is a liberal. People like me believe that McCain is a liberal too, though slightly less so. With McCain as president, when liberal laws are debated, the Republicans in Congress will not fight them, since McCain will champion them. If Hilary were president though, the Republicans in congress would fight tooth and nail to stop them. So we will have less liberal laws passed with Hilary than McCain. Think of the free prescription drug fiasco that Bush championed if you doubt this. Do you think Republicans would have fallen for this entitlement program if Clinton proposed it? Of course not. There are other benefits as well. A loss by McCain will let the Republican overlords know for sure that without being conservative, a Republican candidate can’t win. This is a good thing, imo, since I’m only Republican as long as the party stays conservative. And one last benefit: Remember when Clinton’s liberal policies pissed off America so much that Congress turned hardcore conservative Republican? I’d like to see that happen again. McCain would have the opposite effect. So please don’t say we are whiners when we say we will not support McCain. We’re just trying to make the best of a terrible situation.

  2. Remember when Clinton’s liberal policies pissed off America so much that Congress turned hardcore conservative Republican? Yes. I remember that week very well. It was great. Too bad it didn’t last more than ten minutes past the elections.

  3. Of course you know it DID last more than ten minutes. It lasted blissfully for over a year in full force until clinton started vetoing the budget bill causing government employees to not get paid. They successfully made the Republicans out to be the bad guys last time (when in reality he could have signed any of those bills to get government workers their paychecks), but we’ve got talk radio, blogs, and FOX to tell the truth this time. People who are not politically inclined will not be so easily misguided. But it had even more benefits than we have discussed. It lasted until Jan 2001. Crazy clinton taxation never occurred after 1994, even though we all know he wanted to down to the core of his soul. Tax and spend clinton was blocked by Newt, and we did fairly well as a nation. We probably agree that in Jan 2001, we had our new liberal Republican president, and all of Newt Gingrich’s (dare I say his ‘Reaganesque’ policies) went out the window. We need them back! McCain will not get us closer to that goal. Enough with what the government should be giving us. Let’s dwell on what the government is taking from us. McCain/Clinton/Obama will never ever talk about this, but 2 years of liberalism might make people realize how devastating the idea of liberalism/socialism/progressivism is. This evolution could not happen if McCain is prez, since he’s seen by the unenlightened as a conservative! Make a snarky one line comment about how you disagree with me if you want, Mr. Murdoc, but know that I and others realize that just dragging the line doesn’t benefit Republicans OR Americans. McCain’s ‘(R)’ means nothing to me. It’s a facade.

  4. Heck, at this point, I’m considering voting for the crazy Ron Paul. We’ve tried electing scumbag Presidents, and that hasn’t worked out so well. Maybe we should try electing a crazy one? Maybe he’ll be crazy like a fox! 🙂 No on McCain. Call me a whiny child if you want to. He’s still not getting my vote. No one is. You guys pick the president. I’ll just vote for my Senator and House guy.

  5. You’re right. I apologize for my sarcasm. It wasn’t only ‘ten minutes.’ It was until ‘the first big showdown that could have changed the government, which is what they ran on and were elected for.’ Ten minutes. Ten years. What does it matter? They folded bad on that budget showdown and they have barely even been talking the talk since then, let alone walking the walk. With a few exceptions, I can’t even tell the difference between the Rs and the Ds anymore. Look, I realize that my position is going to cost me with some Conservatives. I also realize that McCain isn’t a terribly Conservative candidate. But he isn’t half as bad as a lot of Conservative make him out to be, and no matter what happens, President McCain would be ten times (fifteen times? twenty?) better than President Clinton or Obama. Issue by issue, he’s better than either of them on almost everything. If you consider the cabinet he’d put together and compare it to the cabinet Hillary would put together, who’s going to do more good (or at least less bad) for Conservative values? You are right about the importance of getting back in Congress. I happen to think that, given the candidates we’ve got to choose from, that the Congressional elections are vitally, crucially important. More important than usual during a presidential election year. But that doesn’t mean that only Congress matters. If you want to focus on Congress, go ahead. If you want to use Congress to foil the president, go ahead. A truly Conservative Congress could foil that hippy liberal McCain, too. But if you’re trying to send a message to the GOP about needing a truly Conservative candidate, you’re way too late. That’s what the primaries are for. I voted Thompson in Michigan. But not too many others did. Huck got four times the votes Fred did and finished third. Paul got 50% more votes than Fred. It’s been obvious for over a month that he wasn’t going to go anywhere. Fred wasn’t going to win jack shit. I don’t think that’s right, but that’s the simple fact. Don’t like it? Get more people to vote Fred in the Primaries. Doing something to help the Libs win the White House (and that’s what you’ll be doing, make no mistake) won’t help anyone but the Libs. Look what George Bush spent a lot of his terms doing: Saying basically ‘Screw Congress and Screw Opinion Polls, I’m doing what I think is right.’ He was able to do most of it. And in many cases Conservatives agreed with him on it. But next up will be Hillary and she’ll say the same thing (even if Repubs get back seats in Congress) and do what she thinks is right and we won’t like the things she does one damn bit. George Bush invaded Iraq and stayed the course in Iraq DESPITE huge pressure to pull out. Hillary could pull out of Iraq DESPITE huge pressure to stay and finish the job. If she wins in a landslide because of splintered opposition, she’ll have even more clout to do whatever the hell she wants. And she’ll use it. No one is going to be able to send any sort of message using a minority party in Congress with a President from the other party in the White House when the so-called ‘true Conservatives’ couldn’t even compete within their own party. At best, Republicans will be able to use the corruption of the Dems over time and attacks on the President to get back Congress, which is exactly what the Dems just did. How well is that working out for them? Do you hope that the GOP will be in 2012 or 2016 where the Dems are today? That’s what I’m afraid the Rush-Coulter plan looks like it will bring. At best. Dems aren’t happy with where they stand today, they’re just happy that so many Republicans are willing to help them. They’ve got nothing else going for them at this point. Our system of government is based upon compromises and using checks and balances, not to attain the perfect, but to avoid the very bad.

  6. Well I doubt that you will lose any conservative viewers. Just a couple of us will disagree with you for a change. No big deal. I agree that you have a valid set of reasons for getting behind McCain. I only hope you understand that I have valid reasons for not doing so. And it has nothing to do with throwing a temper tantrum, or a hissy fit, or whatever else detractors from this position want to characterize it as. Lastly, it’s probably not fair to call this the Rush/Coulter plan. Many of us have been saying this since it was clear that Duncan Hunter had no chance, all the way back in October. Rush and Ann have only very recently joined our group.

  7. Fair enough on the ‘Rush/Coulter plan.’ Also, I wouldn’t dream of trying to say you can’t think what you think is right. I happen to disagree (quite strongly), but go vote what you believe to be best. That’s all I’ve ever asked of anyone, that they educate themselves and then think about things before voting. You’ve obviously done both, and though I can’t agree with your conclusions I can see where you’re coming from. Like I said, I didn’t vote McCain in our primary here, either, so I’m obviously not a huge fan. I’ve also been invited to take part in some local McCain events, but I’ve passed so far. That may change in the future now that things are settling down and he’s likely to be the nominee, but I’ve obviously not felt strongly pro-McCain in the past and I still don’t. I just believe that we’ll be worse off under a Dem than under a so-called Rino. Finally, I would like to say thanks for taking the time an trouble to have a logical and rational discussion. The civility among the Conservatives is important to preserve regardless of where folks come down on this issue. When the dust settles, we’ll still be on the same side.

  8. I have a different perspective on this. My primary issue in this election is the economy, and more specifically the outsourcing of good, high skilled and high paying jobs overseas. Since it looks like the Democrat candidate will be Obama and not Clinton, the way I see it the choice is easy between McCain, who will stay the current suicidal course, or Obama who says he’s for change on this particular issue. I’m voting for Obama who supports my primary issue and will just have to suck it up on the rest.

  9. I have a different perspective on this. My primary issue in this election is the economy, and more specifically the outsourcing of good, high skilled and high paying jobs overseas. Since it looks like the Democrat candidate will be Obama and not Clinton, the way I see it the choice is easy between McCain, who will stay the current suicidal course, or Obama who says he’s for change on this particular issue. I’m voting for Obama who supports my primary issue and will just have to suck it up on the rest.

  10. I would just like to point a few things out, then I will shut up. Compromising with communist principles is still sliding towards communisim. McCain/Feingold ‘Fairness Doctrine’ McCain/Kennedy Second Ammendment rights and the continual whittling away of them that seems to be happening. Do we want more of this? I don’t. I am not voting along party lines, and if everyone in america would just WAKE THE [BEEP] UP and actually vote for someone they truely agree with instead of voting for someone that they have to hold their nose to stomach, then we might actually have REAL CHANGE. With McCain and the dems running the show, we might actually lose our first ammendment rights (McCain/Fiengold and the ‘Fairness Doctrine’). They would shut down talk radio if they could. Yes, they would claim its because Rush/Hannity/Beck/etc. are manipulating the public, but in reality they are our voice, the voice of conservatism, and allow us to communicate those values. They are the soap box. ONce we lose the soap box, we are left with three others. The Jury box, which has been allowing travasties like Border Patrol agents who were trying to protect our country sent to prison for shooting a known drug runner. The Ballot box, which seems to be only giving us the same crew that condones taking away our soap box and turning the Jury Box into a rubber stamp for convitions. Finally there is the Cartridge Box, which they are constantly trying to take away from us. Any politician that wants to disarm the american people is no friend of the people. They only do that when they don’t trust the people, or are afraid the people won’t like their choices. My question for them is, ‘Why don’t you trust me, and what are you planning on doing that is going to piss me off.’ I am voting my consience. I will not vote for someone whos position I do not belive in. I encourage EVERYONE to do the same, weather you agree with me or not.

  11. No candidate will ever agree with you 100% unless that candidate is you. If the destruction of the middle class continues at its current rate there will be no conservatives. Conservatives come mainly from the middle class. The rich and poor tend to be liberal. This may be one election where voting for a liberal is what is required to save conservatives.

  12. ‘My primary issue in this election is the economy, and more specifically the outsourcing of good, high skilled and high paying jobs overseas.’ Dfens, I don’t actually know Obama’s position on this, but you raised an intriguing question when you made this statement. When you ask ‘is outsourcing bad?’ you must also ask, ‘Do we want the rest of the world to be as rich as us’? We probably agree that outsourcing helps people in poor countries by giving them jobs. Where we might disagree is on the answer to this question: ‘Does outsourcing hurt America, or the American people?’ I’m guessing that you think it does, but the answer is not so clear to me. I’ve thought about it for a few years, and STILL don’t have a position on it. Here’s why! I like the idea of people of other countries having a good standard of living. It makes people happy, prosperity makes people more peaceful, and gives them a very good reason not to oppose us politically or militarily since their GDP is intertwined with ours. We all benefit from this, assuming we don’t run out of jobs here in the states. On the other hand, what will happen if other nations achieve our level of greatness? Will we lose our position as the coolest nation on the planet? Yes, we probably will. This should not be a bad thing, but it certainly FEELS like it’s a bad thing. This is aristocratic thinking, or worse, liberal elite ‘we know better than you’ thinking. Sadly, I wholeheartedly believe America knows best and would hate to see our influence diminish. What if people determine that products/services can all be done more cheaply overseas? We’d all lose our jobs, our futures, and our children’s futures. So, do we buy poor nations into greatness, or do we continue to be one of the few great guiding force nations on the planet? It would be wonderful to have all nations be great and guiding, but what direction will they guide us? Some of those directions are pretty scary. imo

  13. Wow…. You know, Murdoc, this conversation is happening on quite a few other sites and forums. And the same, ‘I’m gonna stand on my principles while the house burns down around me’ bulls*** is flowing like a river. You hit it on the head: a bunch of short-sited children who, because things didn’t go just the way they wanted, are willing to have a temper tantrum and refuse to play anymore. Let the party we KNOW is going to screw us gain power (and DON’T tell me two years of a Dem POTUS, House, and Senate doesn’t spell P-O-W-E-R), ’cause we refuse to make the hard choice. And it is a hard choice. You think McCain was MY first choice. It was Fred, who, by the way, can think like an adult: he had to make his own hard choice, and endorse a candidate that he didn’t want either. Its why Bush has come out and tried to paint McCain as a conservative. They’re all playing damage control because WE THE PEOPLE screwed up. McCain didn’t do this on his own. No, no, lets jump up and down and fling poo like all the monkeys in the zoo. Lets throw our vote away in protest and hand the country to the Dems…that will teach the Republicans a lesson. Sure, like the lesson we sent on ‘Black Thursday’ when we handed the house and senate to the Dems on a plater? THAT sure worked, didn’t it? How else do you thing we got McCain, for crying out loud!? Great message, wasn’t it: ‘we want liberals’. Go ahead, vote Obama on his ‘promises’ for a better economy. After all, he is a, ‘very pretty man’. Maybe good looks, no experience and a solid lefty record is just what conservatives are looking for. Sorry , I myself won’t be joining the protest by the terminally short-sited and brain-dead. While I pray that SOMETHING happens prior to the nomination that will change this mess, I don’t intend to hand the country to the smiling Dems, who are probably counting on just this kind of childish behavior. Its only one vote, but I’m not going to waste it. When its over, I’ll be able to honestly say I did everything I could, and didn’t just sit by the sideline and cry.

  14. And the same, ‘I’m gonna stand on my principles while the house burns down around me’ bulls*** is flowing like a river. Misrepresenting people’s positions is something liberals do, not conservatives. Don’t act like a liberal, Ed M. It’s not about standing by principles (though that is a good method for living a happy productive life). It’s about planning. It’s about making our party great again, instead of just slightly less scumbagerous than Democrats. Voting for an almost conservative Republican is not good for America, and it’s much worse for conservatism in general. Disagree if you want, but misrepresenting it as blindly standing by principles is not only short-sighted, but it’s willful ignorance of the facts. That, again, is liberal thinking. Cut it out.

  15. Kevin: ‘It’s about planning. It’s about making our party great again, instead of just slightly less scumbagerous than Democrats. Voting for an almost conservative Republican is not good for America, and it’s much worse for conservatism in general.’ But allowing the Democrats to win is good for conservatism????? What kind of circular reasoning are you trying to pedal? And just what ‘plan’ are you talking about? Talk about liberal double-speak. Filled with nice catch phrases like, ‘about making our party great again’, and, ‘not good for America’. Kevin: ‘Disagree if you want, but misrepresenting it as blindly standing by principles is not only short-sighted, but it’s willful ignorance of the facts. That, again, is liberal thinking. Cut it out.’ You gave no facts other than a dislike of McCain, which I fully understand. I respect your OPINIONS, which I didn’t comment on (unlike yourself). I never said ‘blindly standing by’….you did. My statement refers to those who, even after seeing the true nature of the opposition, solidly refuse to look at the long term damage, in order to avoid making that ‘hard decision’, which I also referred to. This could also be called willful ignorance. If you prefer that, fine. By the way, thanks for the label of ‘liberal’: I didn’t call you names, but you saw fit to ‘put me in my place’, didn’t you. I’m a card carrying independent. And until the Dems take power, I still have the right to make MY opinion known. Unless the owner of the site decides otherwise, which is HIS right since he owns it. If my reply struck a little too close to home and you felt stung, then I suggest you let it roll of your back, as most fair-weather conservatives are doing, and get over it. It was not pointed personally at you. And as far as, ‘Cut it out’ goes, you know where you can stick that. Why not go out on a limb and answer a real question: how is 2 years of a POTUS, House and Senate under Dem rule ‘good’ for the country? Just leave out wishful thinking and fairytales, and I might just agree with you.

  16. Edward, why don’t you address this discussion here instead of the one you’ve had in your head? Nothing you’ve said has anything to do with what’s been discussed here. Kevin, spoken like a true citizen of the world, which you soon may be, if the communist Chinese don’t kick our ass first. In that case, have fun learning to speak Chinese. America’s might has always lay in our industrial strength. This is not some esoteric issue. It is an issue of survival and strength. There are people out there who don’t like us. As for the ‘good’ we’re doing for other countries at the expense of our own, China is so polluted many of their cities are only barely habitable. You think they’re going to love us for exporting unimaginable pollution to their shores? Hardly. Plus we have a whole class of our own best and brightest who have been completely disenfranchised by our ‘off-shoring’ society. When you don’t keep people like these engaged doing things that help society, they tend to spend thier time doing things that hurt society, and they have the intellectual resources to do that very thing. This is nothing but an all around loser. Fortunately the Republicans are self defeating. They have destroyed their own base by their policies that destroy the middle class. They are killing the goose.

  17. Dfens said: ‘Edward, why don’t you address this discussion here instead of the one you’ve had in your head? Nothing you’ve said has anything to do with what’s been discussed here.’ From original post by Murdoc: ‘The whole ‘Let Hillary destroy America instead of McCain’ position is just Stupid Beyond Words.’ Dfens, I suggest you re-read his post….I don’t have a clue what discussion YOUR referring to, but I’ve stayed on topic, even when it shifted to outsourcing jobs overseas. This is about all those who have decided, because McCain is not there favorite candidate, to waste votes or not vote, and as such tilt the election in favor of the Democrats. How did you mistake my post for anything else other than agreement? Try reading it again. And I’ll make one, and only one, comment on outsourcing jobs….We did it to ourselves. Don’t blame the Rep’s OR the Dems: its the average joe who caused this to happen. How? Glad you asked….. Consumers want goods at a cheap price. Everyone wants the best deal, and most consider price over quality. Maybe you’re better, but the masses aren’t. Now couple that with employees who want more and more money to do their job. Eventually this forces the manufactures, unless they are willing to raise prices beyond what the market will bare, to look for areas to cut costs, and guess what….labor is a big one. I worked at a corporation where just this same thing happened: wasn’t one politician in the room with a gun to anybodies head that I could see. True, no politician proposed a bill making it illegal to outsource jobs, but it wasn’t against the law. You want to blame anyone, blame the Unions which pushed for higher and higher wages for less and less production. (Don’t fly of the handle on that: unions played very important parts in the past to secure better working conditions, and I respect that. But all they are now is a bloated organization, sucking up higher and higher dues for little results) Sure, other factors apply: cost of materials going up, transportation costs, etc. But labor is one of the biggest. Hindsight is a wonderful thing: it’s always 20/20, and now everyone sees the extent of the damage caused. And everyone wants to put the blame anywhere but where it belongs. But if we did ‘fix’ it, would you be willing to pay what consumer goods would end up costing? Remember that the next time you’re in WalMart.

  18. Dfens, we are much more closely aligned in our positions than my comment suggested. Don’t hate me yet :). I just find the discussion to be intriguing. We are actively making China and India into great and productive powers. I suspect we have a great ally in India, but we are awakening the sleeping dragon when it comes to China. I have no allusions that they like us or our ways. Again, on the other hand, capitalism is the key to peace in the civilized (i.e. non-muslim) world. So I hope you understand my ambivalence. Ed, ‘But allowing the Democrats to win is good for conservatism?????’ It certainly was in 1994. If you believe that there are no conservatives left in the race like I do, what other choice do you have? I did not mean to call you a ‘liberal’. In fact, I will apologize, liberal style! I apologize if anyone was offended by my calling Ed a liberal. Heh, just kidding. I truly am sorry for saying you suffered from liberal thinking. I was slightly offended that you thought not supporting McCain could only be explained as some petulant child acting out, and went over the line in my reply. It would be nice, Ed, if you’d be kind enough to say that those crazy people who will never ever under any circumstance vote for McCain are possibly not doing it for retributive reasons, but if you can’t find it in you to do this, I’ll understand. It’s a pretty divisive position.

  19. Edward, true enough you’re sticking to Murdoc’s original post, but I thought Kevin and Murdoc had pretty much already pushed the coversation past the idea that there are no reasoned arguements to vote for a Democrat for president. I also laid out my reasons that I will vote for a Democrat for president. I think most conservatives are Americans first and put their party second at best. Now that doesn’t mean I won’t look for good conservatives to vote for in the follow on primaries. I’ll look for them without regard to what letter follows their name. Sure consumers want the best goods for the best price, but the fact of the matter is there are reasons why the Chinese are able to provide those goods that have nothing to do with ‘free trade’. One of the advantages they have is the fact that their government sets the price of their currency on the market. They have pegged the value of their currency against the US dollar. Thus their currency is very undervalued compared to ours. They learned this trick from the Japanese. None of this has anything to do with markets or ‘free trade’. It has everything to do with their government looking out for their economic interests. I don’t mind their government looking out for their interests. All I ask is that ours look out for ours. Instead we have politicians like the Clintons who get rich off of money given to them by the Saudi Arabia and Dubai. Again, that has nothing to do with markets or free trade. It is crooked and it is wrong and it should not be tolerated. Instead you tolerate our sell out politicians and get tough with the unions that in relative terms have done nothing. This kind of economic takeover is not making us closer to China. Just today there was a huge arrest of Chinese espionage agents here in the US. Y’all need to wake up. This isn’t ‘free trade’ it is economic warefare and we have been caught flat on our asses. Probably not conincidentally our military forces are at a low ebb at the same time.

  20. I hate to beat a dead horse, dfens, but please allow me to take a few thwacks at it. Let me first say that I’m 100% behind the military in ANYTHING they choose to do, and I will always support American international policies, at least until they are p*ssified by Hilary or Barrack. I also will not vote for a Democrat for president, ever. Never ever. I’m just not voting for McCain. I happen to believe that the idiotic call for ‘change’ that Obama is repeatedly calling for WILL OCCUR once he’s elected and people realize what an idiot he is and how silly his policies are. A true conservative uprising might happen at that point. Of course it might not, and people might be ok with receiving money borrowed from our kids while our treasury bonds earn junk status. Who knows? I don’t mean to disparage your candidate, but his message of hope and change will get quickly rocked by reality, much to the benefit of America. From what I’ve seen, I believe what you believe. So please don’t hate me because we disagree :). This isn’t our last gasp chance for saving America. But it’s unnervingly close. Forcing the Republican establishment to produce true conservatives should be our ultimate goal. Not Ron Paul style crazy libertarians, just plain old small government conservatives. Remember them?

  21. Not a huge fan of Allapundit, or even the lady who owns him, but… She makes some excellent points. Screw Rs and Ds. The important question is ‘who will lead us conservatively?’ Once we realize that NONE of them will, we have to ask, ‘Which one will hasten a revival of conservatism?’ I think it’s Obama. Of course I won’t vote for him, but I’m relishing the backlash from his policies. It’s going to be a perfect storm for the resurrection of conservatism. Like Carter gave us. Like Clinton gave us. That’s my hope, at least.

  22. From the article you linked to:

    McCain’s supporters continue to mock thoughtful, good-faith critics as ‘deranged.’ The principal objects of scorn are such conservative talk-radio icons as Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, and Sean Hannity.

    It’s funny how it can be bad for people to make fun of some people as ‘deranged’ but then it’s ok to refer to others that way. It all amounts to the same thing the liberals love to do. You dismiss a person’s arguements by attacking them instead of arguing the merits of their ideas. Is Ron Paul nuts for thinking we should not be buffaloed into giving up our soveriegnty? Is he nuts for thinking our government officials should honor their oaths to uphold the US Constitution? Is he nuts to think that a free fall of the value of our currency is a sure path to foreign ownership of our nation? Maybe you should consider his ideas instead of calling him names. Maybe you’re all ignoring the ONLY conservative you had a chance to vote for.

  23. Well that’s my point, Dfens! It’s probably NOT deranged to support Ron Paul, crazy as I think he is. Fully one half of his ideas are good, maybe even great! The other half, primarily ‘fleeing from the enemy’ and returning to the gold standard make him useless in my eyes. But is it fair to call Ron Paul supporters deranged? I don’t think so. They’ve got their weird reasons for supporting him, but they’re not deranged. Nor are supporters of or detractors from McCain deranged. A lot of thought went into all of our positions, and I am guessing that very few of us are going with gut feeling like a liberal might. Again, I’m not sure that foreign ownership of our country is a bad thing. It certainly seems like it would be, but my economist friends tell me it’s not (I’m just an engineer, and a damned good one, since you can’t prove otherwise!:)). Remember, England has owned 12% of the US since the late 70’s when we were babies. Has this fact tightened our friendship? I’ve no idea. But it hasn’t hurt America or Britain, that’s for sure. Japan owns a tiny chunk as well, and we have no more stalwart an ally than them in the pac rim. Good things seem to arise when others have financial interests in our country. I will support you, dfens, in your quest to stop outsourcing to other countries. But it won’t be wholeheartedly. It’s just not as clear to me as it is to you that it’s a bad thing. Still, there’s something to be said for solidarity, and I am aware that my opinion can be wrong. You’ve got my vote on the outsourcing issue, as long as you don’t ask me to vote for McCain.

  24. Aside: What a great thread! Never have I had to question my own conservative bonafides so. Thanks Murdoc! For the record, I support: -as close to ‘no government at all’ as possible -freedom to offend anyone with speech -hmm, that’s about it! Liberty or death, my friends.

  25. So instead of the gold standard we have an unelected and unaccountable ‘private entity’ whose chief is appointed by the Executive branch, not Congress who the US Constitution says is in charge of coining money. Ron Paul’s point is that the whole system is unconstitutional. If we want to change it, fine. Let’s debate what kind of monetary system we should have an vote on the appropriate amendments to make it legal. This is what I don’t like. All of the most significant decisions that effect you and I are being made under the table. We don’t get a voice. We don’t get a vote. Do any of you remember being asked if you wanted the current military procurement system? I mean, what we have makes perfect sense if you’re a lawyer because the way we finance our weapons is exactly the same way we pay a divorce lawyer. The lawyer gives you an estimate of how much it will take. You provide a retainer. He bills your account hourly and let’s you know when to send more money. And look at how well that’s worked out. Our legal system has become far more complex and slower than necessary because everyone is paid by the hour. There is no incentive for things to happen cheaper or faster. It worked so well there that it had to work for defense companies, right? And you were consulted on that, right? As for foreign ownership, do you like the fact that the communist Chinese are buying major parts of companies that are responsible for data security for the US military? Do you like having our banks and major financial institutions beholden to the China and Dubai? Do you think it’s a good idea to give terrorists access to our sea and airports by selling them to Southwest Asian soveriegn funds? We lost 300,000 young men trying to establish a beach head at Normandy, but today we’re willing to sell our enemies a beach head for a cup of pottage. It’s pitiful. We don’t deserve to be a free people, and soon enough we won’t be.

  26. You know, I keep hearing this ‘Ron Paul is crazy’ stuff. Please, elaborate. Its one thing to call someone crazy and back it up. I agree that maybe some of his ideas need a little tempering, but what people are doing when they just call him crazy and then don’t elaborate is the same as McCain bitching about Limbaugh and company but not going into why they are wrong about him. Only after analysis of the issues you find he is ‘crazy’ on can we truely determine that. Just saying it doesn’t make you right either. To address the pulling out of our troops, he is correct in that we are not fighting a ‘Legal’ war over there. When you go to war, the president controls the disposition of the troops, but CONGRESS is in charge of declaring a war. They did not follow the legal mechanisms in place. I won’t say what the right path is, but people keep complaining about how the war is going, so why don’t we try something new? Insanity is doing the same thing while expecting a different result. Do I think we should just pull everyone out right now, like Vietnam? No. DO I think that we might want to start withdrawing them since the citizens and governement of Iraq seems to be doing alot better? I don’t know. All I do know is that if we keep electing the same people we are going to be getting the same crap and Dr. Paul is the only candidate that seems to understand the constitution, which ALL of them are sworn to protect and uphold.

  27. Ron Paul is the only one willing to stand up to this threat:

    ‘Their strategy is to influence U.S. public and congressional opinion to calculate that defending Taiwan would be too costly,’ Tkacik told Cybercast News Service, ‘and induce the U.S. to pressure Taiwan into capitulating to China without a fight [as I’ve been saying for a long time now], in much the same way that Britain and France pressured Austria and then Czechoslovakia in 1938 to give in to Germany without a fight.’ China, he noted, will likely increase its pressure on Taiwan in direct proportion to the expansion of its military power, but Beijing seems to have learned the lesson of Germany, Japan and now Iraq, ‘not to push the pressure beyond what its military forces can support.’ Moreover, China claims territory all around its periphery – exerting severe pressure on Japan to give up the Senkaku Islands, and on Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines to give up their claims to islands in the South China Sea. It also seeks part of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradeshis. Tkacik strongly doubts that simply turning Taiwan over to China to avoid hostilities is likely to pacify the Asian tiger. ‘Appeasement after threats to war only increases the likelihood that (China) will continue its threats to war as an instrument of diplomacy,’ he said. Americans, he concluded, need to be warned of the threat that China poses. ‘Unfortunately, China is acting like an enemy already, yet American policymakers refuse to tell the American people this,’ Tkacik added. – CNS News

    Meanwhile ‘the warrior’ McCain continues to take money from his previous masters the communist Chinese. He’s real tough against 3rd world puke holes though.

  28. Here’s why I think Ron Paul is crazy. You may have other reasons, but I stopped reading about him once I found these three. 1) He wants America and our military to flee from the world. Like it or not, our overseas troops are keeping much of the world free from war. He wants them ALL to come back home. That’s crazy. 2)He wants to return to the gold standard. Note: America is a debtor nation. We don’t HAVE any gold. We OWE gold. This idea would crush the American economy. We didn’t go off of the gold standard on a whim. We had no choice. We still don’t. 3. He doesn’t think the President can protect us internationally without a Congressional declaration of war. Tying the executive branch’s hands behind their backs on the international stage is crazy, plain and simple.

  29. Dfens, I strongly believe that monetary deals HAVE to be made in private or ‘under the table’ as you say. Every time they are discussed openly, it becomes clear to a few more people that our dollars are based upon nothing. They have exactly NO value. The less people who realize that, the better. Paul’s position is untenable. A noble idea, that just won’t work.

  30. 1. If they want our troops, then let them pay for our protection. 2. If the Fed is such a great idea, then why is it unconstitiutional? Don’t you think an amendment allowing its existance would be an easy sell? Why are you against the US Constitution? 3. If it is such a good idea to allow the US President to declare war then why is it unconstitutional? Don’t you think an amendment allowing both the president and congress to declare war would be and easy sell? Why are you against the US Constitution? It’s funny, because Republicans claim, you have to vote for McCain or else you’ll get a Democrat president who won’t appoint strict constitutionalist supreme court justices. Then they turn around and say, ‘hey, ignore what the constitution says, we know what’s good for you.’ Which is it? Do you believe in a nation of laws or don’t you? Are we even a nation if we ignore and make irrelevant our founding documents?

  31. 1. If they want our troops, then let them pay for our protection. I like that idea. But my (admittedly limited) knowledge of the situation tells me it would never happen. The good part of that would be that Japan would very quickly beef up their military, but the bad part would be that South Korea would soon become half of a new country named ‘Korea’. 2. If the Fed is such a great idea, then why is it unconstitiutional? I don’t know that it IS unconstitutional. Only Ron Paulbots are suggesting it is. Since I question their sanity, I don’t give much creedance to their beliefs. 3. If it is such a good idea to allow the US President to declare war then why is it unconstitutional? It’s NOT a good idea to let the President declare war on another nation. That’s why it’s never been done. It IS a good idea to give the President a free hand in attacking scumbagerous nations as a police action, which is why it has occurred so many times since WWII. It’s also not unconstitutional. I hope we keep it that way. I can’t speak for Republicans, but I can tell you in no uncertain terms that I’m not for McCain, and I support the constitution. And I’m a Republican. Old-school type.