It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conservative Support or Not?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:17 AM
link   
McCain : Lieberman

McCain : Feingold

McCain : Kennedy

With McCain's apparently liberal leanings, can we as Conservatives truly get behind him and support him in this election?

If we can not, what are our choices?

This is something I am truly torn about and would like to know what any of you think in reference to this dilemma I am having.

Semper

Edit from Feinstein to Feingold to fix the DUH



[edit on 3/22/2008 by semperfortis]




posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   
So sorry your Party and entire economic Philosophy imploded under the full weight of "complete control" for a decade.

Just stop kidding yourself you even have Party. You don't.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
can we as Conservatives...


Just explain that part. People that get so little about economics they single handedly put us in a recession that now rivals the great Depression?

I mean your smartest people (being gallant) ran EVERYTHING for 10 years. Go to hell.

4 more years of THIS?



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Go to hell.


Sir,

That was completely uncalled for.

I have no idea how I have offended you, but please accept my apology and let's try and not turn any thread into a cursing or slang match, shall we?

Can we discuss the issues without the use of such negative expletives? I believe that we can.

Semper



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis

Go to hell.


Sir,

That was completely uncalled for.


What issue? We're in the Conservative Forum, so based on my listening to Rush Limbaugh, I can call the young adult Chelsea Clinton a PET dog, and tell you all to vote CLINTON so THAT BLACK GUY doesn't make decisions.

I mean you ARE a real CONSERVATIVE right? You know we have purity tests? That's why you started this thread! To purify that gay, can't raise his arms, liberal, can't fly McCain!



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:44 AM
link   
What I did NOT start the thread for was to be cursed...

You obviously have some problem with me and that is fine, but please keep the conversation at least adult and without the use of profanity please.

That is all I ask.

Semper



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
What I did NOT start the thread for was to be cursed...


Oh, then I'll let you go to receive all those insightful answers you truly sought by brilliant conservatives on Above Top Secret to take over the government and install a truly representative Executive, Judicial and Legislative branch that ignored what a moron you truly are, you MINORITY you.

I apologize again for my majority opinion.

Edit to add *snip*.

[edit on 19-3-2008 by RANT]



[edit on 19-3-2008 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Semperfortis I think I may understand your dilemma to some degree . Any one planning to vote along Conservative lines at this years election may have reservations about John Key . I am accept that Key doesn't belong to the right wing arm of the National Party. I have no problem with this given that puts him the closest to my political beliefs .

What I take issue with is that National and Key are all style and no substance and have merely scored off people dissatisfaction with the government. Throw in the fact Key has taken the government position on climate change , asset sales and so on and for the sake of electability and its no wonder ACT is looking to pick up the Conservative vote.

So what should a Conservative voter do in either country ?

The problem is that the Republican party has created standards that they cant live up to McCain certainly isnt as "Liberal" as he is made out to be .



[edit on 19-3-2008 by xpert11]

[edit on 19-3-2008 by xpert11]

[edit on 19-3-2008 by xpert11]



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by RANT
 



Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by semperfortis

Go to hell.


Sir,

That was completely uncalled for.


What issue? We're in the Conservative Forum, so based on my listening to Rush Limbaugh, I can call the young adult Chelsea Clinton a PET dog, and tell you all to vote CLINTON so THAT BLACK GUY doesn't make decisions.

I mean you ARE a real CONSERVATIVE right? You know we have purity tests? That's why you started this thread! To purify that gay, can't raise his arms, liberal, can't fly McCain!

THAT BLACK GUY most likely will be the (D) candidate in November. If you were a true Dittohead, you would know that. So why vote for Billary? To keep the infighting going and thus bankrupt both of their campaigns.

We wouldn't have to do this if *YOU* would have voted for a true conservative, like THAT MORMON GUY.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   
What in God's name is wrong with you RANT?

Semper starts a thread here trying to get some Conservative opinion on a voting dilemma each of us are currently facing, and the only thing you can do is rail on him with insults and expletives?

Honestly I thought more of you than that, I really did. Semper never said he agreed with everything the Republican party has done or will do; he never said anything about economic policy or how the country has been run. He only posed a question about a voting dilemma he, as a Conservative voter, is facing. He never mentioned the Republican party at all, only Conservatives. Which contrary to your viewpoint, the two don't always go hand in hand.

I think if you would set aside your hate for a moment and take a look around, you would find that the Conservative members here at ATS are not Republican drones, but free thinking men and woman who want the best for this country.

I'm quite honestly disgusted by your behavior here.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Standing On Principle

Though it should go without saying, I'll say it anyway: personal attacks and childish insults are not an acceptable substitute for intelligent discussion.

If anything, they symbolize everything that is wrong with U.S. politics these days.
:shk:

For my part, I'm confident that if every member reading this can be assured that all opinions on the topic are welcome as long as they are expressed in accordance with our terms & conditions, then maybe we as a community can at least come to respect our rights to hold differing points of view.

Even if we may not personally agree with them.

Now, I believe the topic was Senator McCain...



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Semper

Imo, our choices are very limited. The main thing to do is to try to get McCain re-elected, realizing that you will be disagreeing with his decisions probably about 30% of the time.

Hopefully he will pick a strong conservative for a running mate. Romney would be my choice.

It's not our first choice, or second or third, but there is no other choice, imo.

The alternative is - Obama or Clinton. Or maybe both ( ...shudder... ).



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   
It is sad but true that we have come to a day of choosing the lessor of two evils....

Several things worry me about McCain, his record, flip-flopping and his age... Will he be the oldest president ever elected? I heard somewhere that he would.....

I would Google it, but Survivor is coming on and I have a date with the wife to watch it...

I would love to see Romney in there, but my guess would be Guiliani as he would bring NY to the table and a big win for McCain there...

Semper



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 10:09 PM
link   
IMO McCain is perceived to be Liberal because the right wing element of the Republican party is in control . To fit the mould that has been created you have to be absolute nut in terms of fiscal policy and social issues. Today Nixon and Ford would be considered to Liberal for the Republican party .

Just look at the kind of flax Rudy got or gets for his stance on gay rights and abortion. McCain has showed he is not purely idealogical driven and blind to facts like many of his bed fellows . Common Sense says that you reign in spending before you cut taxes.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Semper,

First and foremost, let me apologize for the idiocy of some of the responders here. Seems like some people get so worked up that they think everyone is the enemy. They don't realize that THIS is the problem. When i start hating you because you're a conservative, and you start hating me because i'm a liberal. That's just stupid, short-sighted and sure doesn't get anyone anywhere.

I dont know how you should vote if you're looking for a conservative answer. I'm a fiscal conservative and liberal on social issues. I had supported Ron Paul because he was fiscally conservative and supported state's rights, as in their right to decide what is best for their state. I can live with my state deciding that abortion is illegal for example, as long as i know it's not something that was decided by the feds for everyone.

If i were in your position, wanting a true conservative in office, i would vote for the most left wing candidate out there and hope they screw it up so bad that the country will be screaming for a conservative next election cycle. What do you think?

Addendum: i don't see Rudy getting the nod for VP. You can't have two liberal conservatives running because then you don't get the true conservative base. They're going to need to go with someone like Romney or even Huckabee. Sadly, i think Romney would be the obvious choice if he were a presbyterian rather than a Mormon. But if that were the case, he probably would have won the primaries.

[edit on 3/19/2008 by The Cyfre]



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 11:19 PM
link   
I have actually considered that...

The way I figure it is, if we vote Hillary in, at the end of four years the economy will be in the tank, taxes will be the highest in history and Bill will be pimpin out the Lincoln Bedroom...

The only real good that would come of this, is the Conservatives would definitely take complete control of the both houses and render Mrs. Bill impotent at best.

Of course with all that is coming out, I'm not sure that Obama would not be the most Liberal choice...

SHEESH!!!!

What a year huh?

Semper



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 09:23 AM
link   
With McCain and Lieberman touring the Middle East now, it would sure seem that Lieberman might find a place on the ticket.

I can't say that a McCain/Lieberman would be my dream ticket, but we have to face that fact that politics in America is dynamic and what is considered to be conservative or liberal at any given time is likely to be considered very differently in the future.

Certainly, the Democrat Party as it is today would not have appealed to the Democrats of the 40s and 50s.

Indeed, by the mid to late 60s, conservative Democrats had already started to jumped ship.

Here or elsewhere, someone noted that the conservative/liberal issue boils down to issues of integrity and decency, or words to that effect.

Conditions in the world at any given time call for different approaches. That's why I have always eschewed the labels of conservative or liberal for myself in any strict sense.

What is pretty much non-negotiable to me are my core values within reason.

I'm not much interested in which party I vote for as I am in which party most closely represents my values.

Over the years, it was plain to even casual observers that McCain was not your garden variety Republican.

The same can be said for Lieberman as a Democrat, who had the cajones to stand up in the Senate and castigate Clinton's dalliances in the Oval office, although he was a little too wimpy for my tastes.

Now, Lieberman is an Independent and while McCain is still a Republican, few can argue that he isn't independent in his politics.

Many Republicans lament the fact that there have been so few real conservatives represented in the primaries but now that there is no question that McCain has clenched the nomination, Republicans are going to have to just face the fact that it is rare that any American in any election is going to have the privilege of voting for the perfect candidate.

We must consider the pulse of the people.

The term Neo-conservative was new to me when I first started to hear it after Bush was elected in 2000. Although, it was largely used as an invective in any context that an invective might seem appropriate to the writer or speaker, it seems to me that Neo-Con is a term that stands for conservative Republicans who support Israel militarily, which isn't exactly a very radical political position, in my view.

Nonetheless, the term has been bandied about long enough and in concert with the struggle against terrorism in the Middle East, i.e., Afghanistan and Iraq, that overall the public is beginning to have war fatigue, which is kind of pathetic, since compared to WWII, Americans have had few sacrifices during this war and other than the evening news and for the families and friends of those who voluntarily serve, you'd be hard pressed to know that a war is going on.

So, now we have two ideologies at odds in the current presidential race. The Democrat's rhetoric that we must get out of Iraq quickly, even though there is waffling on this because both Democrat candidates know that if they find themselves in the White House, the reality of prosecuting the war on terror will be squarely on the president's shoulders and I'm not sure either candidate would be willing to have a ramping up of terrorist attacks in the US just to satisfy a few campaign promises.

On the other side, we have McCain, who for all the claims about his temper, is about as cool and moderate as any politician that has been seen in a long time. He has strong principles and commitments to seeing the war on terror through and he might go so far as to pick Lieberman as a running mate, which, although going against the conventional wisdom concerning his choice of a running mate, just might make him more popular among the broad mainstream, moderate segment of the voting population.

Bush has been an exceptional president during these difficult times. He has clearly seen the challenges before us and has stayed the course, regardless of the rantings of the squeamish left-wing lunatics who now are the driving force behind the Democrat party.

It takes a special man to ignore popular opinion to stand firm on his principles in matters of national security, without being completely destroyed, as was the case with both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon during the war in Vietnam, although Nixon's problems were a bit more complex.

But the hard line has taken a toll on the American people and regardless of how much change certain candidates promise, come January 2009, there will be change regardless of who wins the election.

Does the general public really want as much change as is promised by the Democrats?

I think not.

I think that what the American people really want is the same level of security that has been established in the wake of 9/11, but with some new faces and some fresh ideas.

The party of surrender might carry the day, but it is my observation over the decades that while the base of support for such policies is highly vocal, it is not very widespread or very deep.

It is one thing to say that one is tired of the war and another to relinquish the security that the war on terrorism, both at home and abroad, has provided for the last eight years.

Regardless of who McCain picks as his running mate and regardless of McCain's leanings over the span of his political life, McCain will have to face up to the realities of the current world conditions, which trump the petty arguments over whether or not McCain is conservative enough, which given our current state is about a meaningful as the argument over whether Obama is black enough.

I have already stated that for me Lieberman would be an acceptable choice, given the choices that the Democrats are offering and given Lieberman's estrangement from the Democrat party.

As for Feinstein or Kennedy, I just cannot imagine that McCain would ever in his weakest moments give either of these nut cases a second thought, unless someone knows something I don't.


[edit on 2008/3/20 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Grady

I think that Semper was pointing out examples of McCain's liberal stance when he said that.

He actually meant to say McCain-Feingold.

Am I right, Semper?



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   
UHHHH

Yeah....

Sorry....


Story of my life, get in a hurry and see what happens...


Semper



new topics




 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join