It really is about race.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

BG whines about not being seriously engaged, but as always, when seriously engaged, he goes away.

Whatever Tex, you just keep on believing that blacks out there aren't voting for Obama b/c of the color of his skin. Even those with an R beside their name. They are simply voting for the Obamessiah for his stance on the issues. Just keep on believing that race isn't a factor at all. To bad I am just a racist for even thinking that race has something to do with it, right?

If you truly don't believe that blacks aren't voting for Obama simply b/c he is black, and some feel like they have to vote for him b/c of that reason or be shunned by their own people if they don't....then you are the most naive person on this board.

Who said that?

Williams said that. Oh, yeah you think he is a hack. But you knew who said that, didn't you? How many columns do you write and how many radio shows do you host? How many book have you written? How many places are you syndicated and how many production companies do you own? Just b/c you don't agree with someone's politics or you don't like them doesn't mean that person doesn't have a following and influence.

You, BG and CCTAU have a predetermined mindset and you try to make the facts fit into it, regardless of whether it is a natural fit or not. BG whines if you don't engage him seriously, and then he ignores thoughtful replies.

Armstrong Williams didn't say this:

"I don't agree with any of his policies...."

He said less definitively:

"I don't necessarily like his policies; I don't like much that he advocates

He further refutes what you say about him, i.e. he disagrees with you:

Many people watching and listening to my national TV and radio appearances this past week seem to have gotten the impression that any support for Obama from me — or any other black conservative, for that matter — is due solely to race. Unfortunately, they have misinterpreted my opinions if they somehow think there is a concrete Obama vote coming from me or that I believe the black community should all rally behind and vote for Obama because he is black.

http://pundits.thehill.com/2008/06/20/allow-me-to-elaborate/

I said Williams was a hack, which AUT and BG take issue with.

In journalism, the term is used to describe a writer who is deemed to operate as a "mercenary" or "pen for hire", expressing their client's political opinions in pamphlets or newspaper articles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hack_writer

In January 2005, USA Today reported that documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act revealed that Williams had been paid $240,000 to promote the controversial No Child Left Behind Act. Williams was hired "to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same". [2]

As part of the agreement, Williams was required "to regularly comment on NCLB during the course of his broadcasts," and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots that aired during the show in 2004".[3] The contract with Williams was part of a $1 million contract between the U.S. Department of Education and the public relations company, Ketchum Inc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong_Williams

He's a hack by definition and personal choice. It has nothing to do with my opinion of his writing or influence.

But let's look at his influence-- he's been a Republican commentator all his life. How many blacks vote Republican? The number is miniscule, regardless of who runs. Armstrong ain't impacting too many black folks.

Al Gore got 90% of the black vote. Now, the assumption is that Obama will get a greater percentage. That seems likely to me. People often vote for whom they like the most, regardless of their policy positions. That's why many Dems voted for Reagan and a significant number voted for Bush over Gore. Obama, so far, comes off as more likeable than McCain to most people. More people say in polls that he shares their values, and many more say that he "cares about people like me." That goes a long way to determining how people vote-- for many people more than policy positions.

So let's say Obama gets 95% of the black vote, compared to Gore's 90%-- how many of those additional 5% are hard-core, conservative Republicans? I doubt very many. The hard-core conservative blacks cited in the article say they aren't voting for him. More than likely, those folks will be non-affiliated, independent or moderate to liberal Republican voters who prefer Obama to McCain. Frankly, alot of white folks in those categories prefer Obama to McCain.

But you want to point to someone who has voted for white candidates all of his or her life and call them racists, because this time around they prefer the black candidate?

Okay, let's assume that a handful, and it can't possibly be more than a handful, because the numbers simply aren't that big, of conservative blacks who agree with McCain (although most hard-core conservatives say they don't really like McCain) vote for Obama because of race. This possibility outrages you.

And yet you are silent regarding the far greater number of whites who won't even consider voting for a black man. We know most blacks will vote for whites, because they do so year-in and-year-out. But polls show almost a quarter of whites ADMIT that they won't vote or probably won't vote for a black man.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...sure_of_friends

You rant and rave over this presumed racial influence over a handful of possible conservative blacks who routinely vote for white candidates as if that is the true racial problem in America. Please get a clue. Take a deep breath before reflexively responding (not you CCTAU, I know you can't help it) and digest these facts for a few minutes.

Racism is far more of a hurdle for Obama than it is a blessing. The challenge of overcoming racist white voters is far greater that whatever assistance he might get from a handful of Republican blacks who vote for him solely because of his race.

[BamaGrad03 0]

BG whines about not being seriously engaged, but as always, when seriously engaged, he goes away.

When you made your post i was well on my way to getting s*** faced while partying my ass off.

I spent the following day recovering.

I'll be back.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

BG whines about not being seriously engaged, but as always, when seriously engaged, he goes away.

When you made your post i was well on my way to getting s*** faced while partying my ass off.

I spent the following day recovering.

I'll be back.

Drink some Gatorade...

[BamaGrad03 0]

BG whines about not being seriously engaged, but as always, when seriously engaged, he goes away.

When you made your post i was well on my way to getting s*** faced while partying my ass off.

I spent the following day recovering.

I'll be back.

Drink some Gatorade...

Well it was the combination of binge drinking, going to bed at 5am, and getting up at 9am that did me in

[TexasTiger 13,053]

BG whines about not being seriously engaged, but as always, when seriously engaged, he goes away.

When you made your post i was well on my way to getting s*** faced while partying my ass off.

I spent the following day recovering.

I'll be back.

BG, if you still have that hangover, please see a doctor.

[BamaGrad03 0]

"I don't necessarily like his policies; I don't like much that he advocates

That is strong enough. Especially coming from a CAREER REPUBLICAN VOTER. If he's a hardcore republican, what does he have in common with the most liberal senator in the country? What does he have in common with a marxist who thinks it's ok to kill living babies? NOTHING. Not a single republican has anything in common with Obama. If you're liberal, and you want to vote for him, fine. But don't tell me that as a republican you believe in all the things that the republicans align with, but you are gonna vote for the most liberal senator in the country...and it has nothing to do with him being black.

He further refutes what you say about him, i.e. he disagrees with you:

Of COURSE he disagrees with me. What's he gonna say? "Yeah, I'm a hardcore republican...pro life, anti socialist, anti gvt health care, anti entitlement programs...but I'm voting for this guy, because he's black"

If you "don't necessarily like his policies" and "don't like much that he advocates"...then what the hell are you doing pondering a vote for the dude?

The guy may be a hack, but that doesn't mean he hasn't been a lifer republican.

Your final point is flawed. Of COURSE I expect him to get 99.999999% of the black vote. It makes sense that he would since most of them identify themselves as liberal democrats.

But when a black person, who is staunchly republican, says they are considering voting for possibly the most liberal guy who's ever run for president...you can't tell me there isn't something else in play.

That'd be like you voting for George Bush's MORE conservative long lost cousin...and expecting us to not raise an eyebrow.

And this all comes on the heels of me hearing for the last month...DAILY black callers calling into radio (both conservative radio and not) suggesting that the ONLY reason a person would not vote for Obama is because they are racist...because political affilitation doesn't matter. Just like we are going to be FORCED to do community service under Obama...we no longer get to have our own opinion about politics. We get to have politically uninformed callers, who can't even tell you Barack's policies, call US racist because we don't want to vote for him.

You could see how I would be a little put out by the whole ordeal.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

"I don't necessarily like his policies; I don't like much that he advocates

That is strong enough. Especially coming from a CAREER REPUBLICAN VOTER. If he's a hardcore republican, what does he have in common with the most liberal senator in the country? What does he have in common with a marxist who thinks it's ok to kill living babies? NOTHING. Not a single republican has anything in common with Obama. If you're liberal, and you want to vote for him, fine. But don't tell me that as a republican you believe in all the things that the republicans align with, but you are gonna vote for the most liberal senator in the country...and it has nothing to do with him being black.

He further refutes what you say about him, i.e. he disagrees with you:

Of COURSE he disagrees with me. What's he gonna say? "Yeah, I'm a hardcore republican...pro life, anti socialist, anti gvt health care, anti entitlement programs...but I'm voting for this guy, because he's black"

If you "don't necessarily like his policies" and "don't like much that he advocates"...then what the hell are you doing pondering a vote for the dude?

The guy may be a hack, but that doesn't mean he hasn't been a lifer republican.

Your final point is flawed. Of COURSE I expect him to get 99.999999% of the black vote. It makes sense that he would since most of them identify themselves as liberal democrats.

But when a black person, who is staunchly republican, says they are considering voting for possibly the most liberal guy who's ever run for president...you can't tell me there isn't something else in play.

That'd be like you voting for George Bush's MORE conservative long lost cousin...and expecting us to not raise an eyebrow.

And this all comes on the heels of me hearing for the last month...DAILY black callers calling into radio (both conservative radio and not) suggesting that the ONLY reason a person would not vote for Obama is because they are racist...because political affilitation doesn't matter. Just like we are going to be FORCED to do community service under Obama...we no longer get to have our own opinion about politics. We get to have politically uninformed callers, who can't even tell you Barack's policies, call US racist because we don't want to vote for him.

You could see how I would be a little put out by the whole ordeal.

Anonymous idiots call in to a radio show and you let it impact you significantly? Step away from the radio, young man.

Why might a life-long Republican vote for Obama?

Think more broadly---

I'm a lifelong conservative activist and I'm backing Barack Obama

BY LARRY HUNTER

Wednesday, July 16th 2008, 7:39 PM

I'm a lifelong Republican - a supply-side conservative. I worked in the Reagan White House. I was the chief economist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for five years. In 1994, I helped write the Republican Contract with America. I served on Bob Dole's presidential campaign team and was chief economist for Jack Kemp's Empower America.

This November, I'm voting for Barack Obama.

When I first made this decision, many colleagues were shocked. How could I support a candidate with a domestic policy platform that's antithetical to almost everything I believe in?

The answer is simple: Unjustified war and unconstitutional abridgment of individual rights vs. ill-conceived tax and economic policies - this is the difference between venial and mortal sins.

Taxes, economic policy and health care reform matter, of course. But how we extract ourselves from the bloody boondoggle in Iraq, how we avoid getting into a war with Iran and how we preserve our individual rights while dealing with real foreign threats - these are of greater importance.

John McCain would continue the Bush administration's commitment to interventionism and constitutional overreach. Obama promises a humbler engagement with our allies, while promising retaliation against any enemy who dares attack us. That's what conservatism used to mean - and it's what George W. Bush promised as a candidate.

Plus, when it comes to domestic issues, I don't take Obama at his word. That may sound cynical. But the fact that he says just about all the wrong things on domestic issues doesn't bother me as much as it once would have. After all, the Republicans said all the right things - fiscal responsibility, spending restraint - and it didn't mean a thing. It is a sad commentary on American politics today, but it's taken as a given that politicians, all of them, must pander, obfuscate and prevaricate.

Besides, I suspect Obama is more free-market friendly than he lets on. He taught at the University of Chicago, a hotbed of right-of-center thought. His economic advisers, notably Austan Goolsbee, recognize that ordinary citizens stand to gain more from open markets than from government meddling. That's got to rub off.

When it comes to health care, I am hoping Obama quietly recognizes that a crusade against pharmaceutical companies would result in the opposite of any intended effect. And in any event, McCain's plans in this area are deeply problematic, too. Take drug reimportation. McCain (like Obama) says he's perfectly comfortable with this ill-conceived scheme, which would drive research and development dollars away from the next generation of miracle cures.

But overall, based on his embrace of centrist advisers and policies, it seems likely that Obama will turn out to be in the mold of John Kennedy - who was fond of noting that "a rising tide lifts all boats." Over the last few decades, economic growth has made Americans at every income level better off. For all his borderline pessimistic rhetoric, Obama knows this. And I believe he is savvy enough to realize that the real threat to middle-class families and the poor - an economic undertow that drags everyone down - cannot be counteracted by an activist government.

Or maybe not. But here's the thing: Even if my hopes on domestic policy are dashed and Obama reveals himself as an unreconstructed, dyed-in-the-wool, big-government liberal, I'm still voting for him.

These past eight years, we have spent over a trillion dollars on foreign soil - and lost countless lives - and done what I consider irreparable damage to our Constitution.

If economic damage from well-intentioned but misbegotten Obama economic schemes is the ransom we must pay him to clean up this foreign policy mess, then so be it. It's not nearly as costly as enduring four more years of what we suffered the last eight years.

Hunter is the former staff director of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee and president of the Social Security Institute.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/0...ivist_and_.html

[BamaGrad03 0]

Anonymous idiots call in to a radio show and you let it impact you significantly? Step away from the radio, young man.

Why might a life-long Republican vote for Obama?

Think more broadly---

You're making a mistake in your association. Our problem is not with people who DISAGREE with McCain, or AGREE with Obama...even if they're lifers.

Our problem is with people who say "I don't suport Obama's policies...but a black president would be 'historical'"

THATS where there is a problem. And I don't understand why you can't see WHY we would have a problem with that.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

Anonymous idiots call in to a radio show and you let it impact you significantly? Step away from the radio, young man.

Why might a life-long Republican vote for Obama?

Think more broadly---

You're making a mistake in your association. Our problem is not with people who DISAGREE with McCain, or AGREE with Obama...even if they're lifers.

Our problem is with people who say "I don't suport Obama's policies...but a black president would be 'historical'"

THATS where there is a problem. And I don't understand why you can't see WHY we would have a problem with that.

You're all over the map with what bothers you so much. You have repeatedly said it is this:

And this all comes on the heels of me hearing for the last month...DAILY black callers calling into radio (both conservative radio and not) suggesting that the ONLY reason a person would not vote for Obama is because they are racist...because political affilitation doesn't matter. Just like we are going to be FORCED to do community service under Obama...we no longer get to have our own opinion about politics. We get to have politically uninformed callers, who can't even tell you Barack's policies, call US racist because we don't want to vote for him.

You could see how I would be a little put out by the whole ordeal.

Now, let's put aside for a moment the insane manner in which you characterize Obama FORCING you to do community service, -- you've complained repeatedly about anonymous people supposedly claiming you are racist if you don't vote for Obama. This really bothers you. Stop listening if you can't handle the sheer inanity of talk radio.

So if now your only real problem is with people that say they disagree with Obama's policies, but his presidency would be historic, which I guess is Armstrong, that statement is correct-- it would be historic. Armstrong still hasn't said he's voting for Obama.

But you also said this:

But when a black person, who is staunchly republican, says they are considering voting for possibly the most liberal guy who's ever run for president...you can't tell me there isn't something else in play.

So I give you a column by a WHITE staunch Republican who has said he is definitely voting for Republican and it has little to do with his race. There are far more white Republicans who have said they are voting for Obama. So my point is that there are many reasons to prefer Obama over McCain at this point in history that have nothing to do with his race and a lot to do with Republicans. If this were 1984 and Reagan were running against Obama, I doubt you'd see many Republicans, black or white, voting for Obama. I doubt you'll see many black Republicans vote for Obama this year, in fact.

[BamaGrad03 0]

So I give you a column by a WHITE staunch Republican who has said he is definitely voting for Republican and it has little to do with his race. There are far more white Republicans who have said they are voting for Obama. So my point is that there are many reasons to prefer Obama over McCain at this point in history that have nothing to do with his race and a lot to do with Republicans. If this were 1984 and Reagan were running against Obama, I doubt you'd see many Republicans, black or white, voting for Obama. I doubt you'll see many black Republicans vote for Obama this year, in fact.

Again, even if it's a republican...who can look at the two on paper and say "I'm voting for Obama because I feel more aligned with his policies"...I'm OK with that. It's their choice...and at the end of the day, ALL it should be about is where they stand on the issues. But I SERIOUSLY question anyone who calls themselves a republican who can vote for a staunch socialist.

Obama is more liberal than Bush is conservative. And I'd SERIOUSLY question any democrat who voted for Bush.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

So I give you a column by a WHITE staunch Republican who has said he is definitely voting for Republican and it has little to do with his race. There are far more white Republicans who have said they are voting for Obama. So my point is that there are many reasons to prefer Obama over McCain at this point in history that have nothing to do with his race and a lot to do with Republicans. If this were 1984 and Reagan were running against Obama, I doubt you'd see many Republicans, black or white, voting for Obama. I doubt you'll see many black Republicans vote for Obama this year, in fact.

Again, even if it's a republican...who can look at the two on paper and say "I'm voting for Obama because I feel more aligned with his policies"...I'm OK with that. It's their choice...and at the end of the day, ALL it should be about is where they stand on the issues. But I SERIOUSLY question anyone who calls themselves a republican who can vote for a staunch socialist.

Obama is more liberal than Bush is conservative. And I'd SERIOUSLY question any democrat who voted for Bush.

You don't understand how many long-standing, true conservatives are disgusted with the direction of the Republican party on fundamental issues. You can't see how far the party has strayed.

"Librul, librul, librul." Focus on facts, not labels.

And turn off the radio. You'll be smarter and feel better.

[BamaGrad03 0]

You don't understand how many long-standing, true conservatives are disgusted with the direction of the Republican party on fundamental issues. You can't see how far the party has strayed.

Being frustrated with the party doesn't make one do a complete 180 and vote for a candidate who stands for the complete opposite of everything you stand for.

I'm frustrated with many key issues within the republican party. But I think it's more of a frustration with politicians in general. There's no way I'd vote for a socialist who has a voting record that is directly counter to everything I stand for.

There are ZERO facts about Obama's voting record that would put him in line with Republican ideals. ZERO.

Why are you having such a hard time with this? Why do liberals have such a hard time with anyone disagreeing with them? "If you don't agree with our policies...its because you haven't educated yourself...if you educated yourself, then you'd agree with us."

That's a pretty pious opinion to have.

Again, I don't expect a staunch democrat to turn his back on principles he believes in. Why do you expect staunch republicans to just instantly not care about the ones important to them?

[tiger88 934]

Voting for obama because he is black reminds me of the chris rock jokes about the oj verdict. He joked about how some said it was a victory for black people, yet he never got his oj prize.

Same thing with obama. If he somehow got elected a year or two later after he laid waste to this country with his taxation policies and such, and the economy was in ruins, all that voted for him would be wondering where their obama prize was.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

You don't understand how many long-standing, true conservatives are disgusted with the direction of the Republican party on fundamental issues. You can't see how far the party has strayed.

Being frustrated with the party doesn't make one do a complete 180 and vote for a candidate who stands for the complete opposite of everything you stand for.

I'm frustrated with many key issues within the republican party. But I think it's more of a frustration with politicians in general. There's no way I'd vote for a socialist who has a voting record that is directly counter to everything I stand for.

There are ZERO facts about Obama's voting record that would put him in line with Republican ideals. ZERO.

Why are you having such a hard time with this? Why do liberals have such a hard time with anyone disagreeing with them? "If you don't agree with our policies...its because you haven't educated yourself...if you educated yourself, then you'd agree with us."

That's a pretty pious opinion to have.

Again, I don't expect a staunch democrat to turn his back on principles he believes in. Why do you expect staunch republicans to just instantly not care about the ones important to them?

Hey genius, you seem to fail to understand that you are on a political forum. People disagree with each other here. Why do you you "conservatives" have such hard time with that?

You tend to see things as "this or that", "black and white", "liberal or conservative." You're frankly too young to remember the Republican party many folks who say they are voting for Obama grew up in, and you obviously haven't educated yourself to understand it. For some conservatives, such as Titan on this board, they look at the whole picture, conclude they agree on McCain on some key issues that matter most to them and vote accordingly, despite reservations about other things. For folks like Larry Hunter who wrote the piece I cited and that you apparently did not read, it comes down to this:

This November, I'm voting for Barack Obama.

When I first made this decision, many colleagues were shocked. How could I support a candidate with a domestic policy platform that's antithetical to almost everything I believe in?

The answer is simple: Unjustified war and unconstitutional abridgment of individual rights vs. ill-conceived tax and economic policies - this is the difference between venial and mortal sins

I think that both Titan and Larry Hunter are thoughtful conservatives with whom I may disagree with on a number of things. I respect their respective and differing positions on this issue, however.

Joe Lieberman is voting for John McCain, even though he agrees with, and votes with, Barack Obama on far more issues. Do you think he's crazy?

Like you, I expect staunch Republicans to care very deeply about the issues that mean the most to them and vote accordingly. Unlike you, I just happen to understand that there are still a small subset of Republicans who are actually complex people who can't be summarized as easily as you can be and as you do to others.

[BamaGrad03 0]

I think that both Titan and Larry Hunter are thoughtful conservatives with whom I may disagree with on a number of things. I respect their respective and differing positions on this issue, however.

Joe Lieberman is voting for John McCain, even though he agrees with, and votes with, Barack Obama on far more issues. Do you think he's crazy?

Like you, I expect staunch Republicans to care very deeply about the issues that mean the most to them and vote accordingly. Unlike you, I just happen to understand that there are still a small subset of Republicans who are actually complex people who can't be summarized as easily as you can be and as you do to others.

First of all, I wouldn't call Titan a straight ticket conservative. He's far from lock-step when it comes to capitalism...he leans more towards the redistribution of wealth ideal. Secondly, he's already said he can't vote for Obama...because of what he believes in. So I think that's pretty clear cut.

And I agree that there are people out there who are more to the center than me. And I never said EVERY republican should vote for McCain or there's race involved. Again, I'm talking about people who historically are as conservative (OR more) than me. Those people have no place voting for the most liberal senator alive today. Just like you'd have no place voting for GWB.

Hey genius, you seem to fail to understand that you are on a political forum. People disagree with each other here. Why do you you "conservatives" have such hard time with that?

Again with the attitude. I just don't understand why it's needed.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

Hey genius, you seem to fail to understand that you are on a political forum. People disagree with each other here. Why do you you "conservatives" have such hard time with that?

Again with the attitude. I just don't understand why it's needed.

Are you truly this dense? This was a direct response to this attitude-laden comment by you:

Why are you having such a hard time with this? Why do liberals have such a hard time with anyone disagreeing with them? "

I guess I should say something like, "Hypocrisy comes so natural to Republicans, you didn't even notice."

You still fail to grasp that what is "conservative" is not necessarily defined by what you believe.

[BamaGrad03 0]

So you're saying there's room under the "lifelong staunch republican" umbrella to support someone who is:

Fiscially socialist

Supports more entitlement programs than any president in history

Supports aggressive tax increases

Has a 20 year CLOSE relationship with someone who overtly despises white america

Who has the most liberal voting record of any senator

Who has the most aggressively liberal stance on abortion that we've seen...ever

[CCTAU 3,351]

So you're saying there's room under the "lifelong staunch republican" umbrella to support someone who is:

Fiscially socialist

Supports more entitlement programs than any president in history

Supports aggressive tax increases

Has a 20 year CLOSE relationship with someone who overtly despises white america

Who has the most liberal voting record of any senator

Who has the most aggressively liberal stance on abortion that we've seen...ever

Dude, don't you get it? In this new liberal world, if you say the word "race" and you are white, you are automatically racist. It's not like it's obvious to everyone else. The article brings up the question as to why a BLACK republican would vote democrat and one of the answers has to do with going with my heart. That is very obvious to most folks. Why all the bickering about any other peripheral crap. It is what it is. But to point it out is not racist.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

So you're saying there's room under the "lifelong staunch republican" umbrella to support someone who is:

Fiscially socialist

Supports more entitlement programs than any president in history

Supports aggressive tax increases

Has a 20 year CLOSE relationship with someone who overtly despises white america

Who has the most liberal voting record of any senator

Who has the most aggressively liberal stance on abortion that we've seen...ever

Without addressing your irrational, over the top, right-wing-talking point description of Obama,

are you saying this guy's:

I'm a lifelong Republican - a supply-side conservative. I worked in the Reagan White House. I was the chief economist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for five years. In 1994, I helped write the Republican Contract with America. I served on Bob Dole's presidential campaign team and was chief economist for Jack Kemp's Empower America.

Republican bona fides are less than yours?

You, know there is a reason they call them "neo conservatives"-- THEY AREN'T TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVES.

For Larry Hunter, this is a key distinction between McCain and the Republican party he signed onto. You ignore everything you can't answer, as always, but he gave his reasons:

This November, I'm voting for Barack Obama.

When I first made this decision, many colleagues were shocked. How could I support a candidate with a domestic policy platform that's antithetical to almost everything I believe in?

The answer is simple: Unjustified war and unconstitutional abridgment of individual rights vs. ill-conceived tax and economic policies - this is the difference between venial and mortal sins

His decision is driven by his principles-- he doesn't like his choices, but he must make a choice. Titan has expressed that he doesn't like his choices, but he has made one based on the principles he feels most strongly about.

Imagine this-- if Hagel were the Republican nominee and Joe Lieberman were the Democratic nominee, think how voting patterns might look. Now, Hagel is more conservative than John McCain, except on the Iraq war. Lieberman is consistently Democratic in his voting-- except on foreign policy. Yet these distinctions would push people into unfamiliar camps. Why is this so hard to understand?

For many conservatives, John McCain isn't conservative-- Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter said they would support Hillary over McCain. They see him as restricting political free speech and others see him as favoring a foreign policy more Wilsonian than traditionally conservative. The world simply is not as simple as you see it.

[BamaGrad03 0]

Without addressing your irrational, over the top, right-wing-talking point description of Obama,

What did I say that was incorrect?

[TexasTiger 13,053]

Without addressing your irrational, over the top, right-wing-talking point description of Obama,

What did I say that was incorrect?

Respond to the meat of my post before we get sidetracked.

[autigeremt 6,719]

I think you (Texas Tiger) need to get real with your side of the isle. If you can't see with your own eyes and hear with your own ears the rhetoric that comes from the left on taxes, defense, morality, spending, social programs, and the "overall" environment, then you need to listen and look a little harder.

You have every God given, American born right to think the way you do. The only thing left for you is to recognize the policies of your party and say......"Why yes, we are in full support of a World Order and the Socialist Monvement, where every citizen should pay half of their earnings into the government to offset those who WILL NOT obide by the law, self responsibility, and the ethical, moral, and legal code".....

There are BAD APPLES on the right as well. I don't agree with their hard right stance on some of the issues we face. That's why I am for the more Independent, slightly to the right candidate in this election.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

I think you (Texas Tiger) need to get real with your side of the isle. If you can't see with your own eyes and hear with your own ears the rhetoric that comes from the left on taxes, defense, morality, spending, social programs, and the "overall" environment, then you need to listen and look a little harder.

You have every God given, American born right to think the way you do. The only thing left for you is to recognize the policies of your party and say......"Why yes, we are in full support of a World Order and the Socialist Monvement, where every citizen should pay half of their earnings into the government to offset those who WILL NOT obide by the law, self responsibility, and the ethical, moral, and legal code".....

There are BAD APPLES on the right as well. I don't agree with their hard right stance on some of the issues we face. That's why I am for the more Independent, slightly to the right candidate in this election.

We see the world in a fundamentally different way. I think you have blinders on, you seem to think the same of me. I can live with that.

[BamaGrad03 0]

You, know there is a reason they call them "neo conservatives"-- THEY AREN'T TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVES.

I'm not neo conservative. I've voted for democrats before. And will again. You can't argue that the overwhelming majority of Obama's beliefs on the issues aren't in stark contrast to what TRADITIONAL republicans believe. You just can't. It's an inarguable position to have.

Basically, your position is that ANY conservative who couldn't imagine voting for Obama is a fringe right wing looney. And you're wrong. Again, I don't understand why you think it should be SOOOO easy for staunch republicans to give up everything they believe in...and vote for Obama...yet the thought of a staunch liberal voting for GWB is asinine.

It makes sense though. Because the liberal position today has become: either agree with us or be labled a neo-con fringe looney. If you don't think gays are the best thing evaaar...you're intolerant. If you think the poor should try and find a job...you hate poor people.

It's like you guys are so outwardly passionate about your beliefs, but fully expect us to be totally malleable on our convictions.

I don't get that.

Secondly, for you to sit here and say that Republicans should vote for someone more left than Ted Kennedy...because the other guy running is a centrist...is a freaking riot. I don't get that at all. "Well, McCain isn't a traditional hardcore right winger...so you may as well vote for the staunch pro-life tax and spend extremely liberal democrat"

How does that make any sense at all? I don't like my choices. I think they both suck. They are both good dudes, but neither will make GREAT presidents. But that doesn't mean I'm going to pick the guy who believes OPPOSITE of what I believe in...over the guy who believes in a LOT of what I believe in.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

You can't argue that the overwhelming majority of Obama's beliefs on the issues aren't in stark contrast to what TRADITIONAL republicans believe. You just can't. It's an inarguable position to have.

I haven't tried to.

Basically, your position is that ANY conservative who couldn't imagine voting for Obama is a fringe right wing looney.

Not my position.

Again, I don't understand why you think it should be SOOOO easy for staunch republicans to give up everything they believe in...and vote for Obama...yet the thought of a staunch liberal voting for GWB is asinine.

Never said that, either.

Secondly, for you to sit here and say that Republicans should vote for someone more left than Ted Kennedy...because the other guy running is a centrist...is a freaking riot.

Haven't said that either.

How does that make any sense at all?

It doesn't. You don't respond to the actual points I make. I don't know if it is because you don't really bother to read them, don't bother to think about them, or simply aren't capable of a rationale discussion in which you actually consider what a person says as opposed to the pre-fabbed arguments you already have running through your head, but whatever it is, it sure is striking.