Demand Biblical Worship
The Case Against McCain
Readers of this blog will need a pretty strong case for McCain to hold their noses and vote for him in November. As Laura at Pursuing Holiness explains, there is simply no valid reason to vote for him.
For me, the most compelling reason was the McCain-Kennedy amnesty. I jus can’t seem to see the sense in going to war overseas as Bush and McCain have and will have us do if we’re to just let Islamic savages from all over the world come and settle next door. I also don’t believe the “Hispanic family values” lie after too many personal experiences.
I’m a single issue voter, I guess. I suppose the next president will pass some amnesty, and then it’s bye-bye America. At least I won’t bring a rope to my own hanging by voting for THE AUTHOR of the amnesty.
The most telling part of Laura's post touches on a point I try to make:He thinks conservatism is a dead ideology that doesn’t recognize that the world has moved on. It has lost its relevance in a nation where the old paradigms are falling away. We are becoming a nation of Mexican and Latino immigrants, legal and illegal. That must be recognized and catered to. We can no longer afford the wild swings and gyrations of what he views as unfettered capitalism. The people at the top make - and keep - too much money. He proposes to fix that. All of the rest of his programs and policies reflect -not a conservative sensibility - but an accomodationist, populist vision: He sees the future of America as One Big Party, with all those scurrilous, hard-nosed, stubborn shell-backs on both the left and the right who prate that principles are more important than pragmatic politics effectively sealed out of the process of representative government.
There you have it, Euro-Americans - piss off and die! This democracy isn't for you.
The next amnesty will have me planning a move to much colder climes, hopefully where I won't have to fund my own demographic replacement with my tax dollars.
PRCalDude
29 Comments
Reader Comments (29)
The best I can come up with is that he isn't Hillary Clinton and he isn't Barak Obama.
Hubby and I discussed this (again) tonight. We may just write in the Constitution Party candidate. He probably doesn't have a snowball's chance, but at least we agree with him on most issues; far more so than we do with McCain.
Besides, I'd rather not leave that spot blank on the ballot, if you get my drift.
If you believe the punditry, if you're white and educated you have to vote for Obama. That's who I'll vote for. I'll cut off my nose to spite my face.
Ya know, Jen, I also like the current Constitution party platform. I sent a note asking for more information about their activities 3 months ago and have heard nothing back from them. Of course the Republican party in my area doesn't talk to me either. But I get canvased by the Dems every election at least 3 times.
If I thought that a vote for the Constitution party would not be more of a help to the Democrats I would vote for them also.
Far-Left President with a Dem Congress and Senate and atleast 2 SCOTUS picks is reason enough to hold the nose. gridlock is better than alternative. Plus, McCain may become more conservative on certian issues as a buffer, some of his past was not about the issue but positioning himself to win over the moderates. its a game.
I also don't see why people seem to think a vote for someone you don't 100% agree with is such a no no. You can vote for someone and then disagree with them on select issues as they come about.
the other point is I'd rather roll the dice with mcCain than the above scenario.
voting 3rd parties is basically a defacto vote for Obama, mathematically speaking. I have problems with the "Constitution" party as much as the Repubs., much of what they claim is "unconstitutional" isnt so, plus alot of what they talk about is unworkable given political realities.
Bob Barr has the best shot to hurt Repubs and help Obama, if he gets LP nod
plus, atleast McCain is solid Pro-Life with exception of Stem Cells which is no longer an issue, thanks to Bush and new discoveries.
Obama is about as extreme a candidate that has ever come on the issue, going farther than partial birth abortion into supporting "Live Birth Abortion" something very few politicians have ever voted in favor of.
the guy has a 81% lifetime ACU rating, I sure don't "100%" disagree with him, at a minumum its 20% vs. about 90 to 100% disagree with Obama
Because I 100% disagree with him.
I have trouble supporting McCain because he has told us who and what he is over and over and I don't like what I see. I'm not real happy with McCain's 'hallelujah-I-see-light'conservative stances after repeatedly throwing the US under the bus. I don't think a leopard can change his spots.
McCain superfluously said during his campaign that there could be no drilling in ANWR. It was a dead issue but he said it anyway just to rub it in conservatives faces. Theres something perverse about his behaviour towards conservatives.
That said who can blame anyone for voting for him as opposed to Obama? I think that any conservative who does vote for him should do so in the knowledge that he is their adversary and buckle down to oppose almost everything he tries to do in office.
exactly.
The reason you don't want to as a conservative is because McCain will pull the entire GOP in that direction, if it's not too far gone already.
The reason you don't want to as a conservative is because McCain will pull the entire GOP in that direction, if it's not too far gone already.
I agree 100%. I was trying to be charitable to jp.
I am sympathetic because you are faced between voting for Osiris the Sun God or the Emperor Caligula, Ruler of the Multicultural Domains.
In Ireland we have the choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledum. The two main political parties run on identical conservative platforms and always have since the foundation of the state.
(Tweedledee doesn't even get a look in.)
Very comforting in a way but when they get something wrong its all in, as they say in poker.
"plus, atleast McCain is solid Pro-Life with exception of Stem Cells...."
I think you mean he is anti-abortion, which is very different from being pro-life. He supports the genocide of the American nation through immigration, which means he is anything but pro-life.
I talked to several conservatives this weekend, and all believe that there is no "lesser of two evils" to vote for this weekend, but they at least understand Obama.
there aren't many conservatives who voted for Perot, who don't today regret it and realize what they did.
politics is an imperfect game, I think McCain is more conservative than his recent record and many of his stances for for political reasons(win over the Center). Have no idea what he'd do in office but I know having a Veto power in the Whitehouse to thwart much of the Socialist agenda vs. a Socialist to sign it.
plus I think overall his worldview is much better than Obama's. If another 9/11 happens I'd much rather have McCain in there than Obama............anyway, if there is a Perot this time around its Bob Barr.
another thing I fear, if Obama gets elected he will pass Amnesty for illegals(a worse kind that whatever McCain is thinking about) and the political ramifications will be horrible most likely. The hispanic vote will turn into the black vote and go Dem.(like after Great Society) and even if the conservatives took over the party again, because of the demographics they would never hold any real power in washington again. We will become france, could get ugly, etc.
i hope i'm wrong
Let's back up here, shall we? Perot doing just fine in the general election until he dropped out. People lost confidence in him when he jumped back in. Had it not been for that, they outcome might have been a lot different. Thanks to McCain-Feingold, however, we might never have another rich, capable guy running again.
He has a Hispanic outreach director named Juan Hernandez who is openly reconquista. MM blogs about it all the time. Personally, I'd prefer the more catastrophic amnesty to the slow-bleed strategy currently at work. The Mexicans are going to vote in whowever is best for their race. They are a monolithic Democratic voting block just like the blacks and there is no way in hell we're getting them into the Republican party. There will always be antagonism between whites, blacks and hispanics because they each have different cultures and the latter two perform poorly in general in the standardized tests necessary to get into middle class jobs. like it or not, they are the new permanent underclass and will vote accordingly. We will continue to balkanize and fund our own demographic replacement through welfare.
they are 90/10 a Dem voting block, before the "Great Society" with all the rhetoric against Repubs. that came with it. before that it was about 80-20 voting for Repubs(which went back to Civil War). Dems will try to claim it was JFK supporting the Civil Rights act, when in reality many more repubs in congress supported it than Dems and the DixieCrats were Dems of course.
Bush got 45% of the Hispanic vote in 2004(a high and it won the election for him), repubs have to get around the 40% range or they can not win. Thats the big fear at play here and why our leadership is where it is on the issue. If the Hispanic vote drops to 80/20 for Dems, they will win landslides from here on out.
Now, because of this and the far-left worldview the Dems and ron paul types have given the threats we face. I'm not all that sure our Caesar isn't about to come, if for any other reason to do what needs to be done. bad times all around.
Steve Sailer covered this. Bush got 37% - not 45% - by racial pandering. What's good for the Mexicans is bad for whites. Yes, Dems will be winning in landslides from here on out. That's the point VDARE makes all the time. Oh well, I guess. Something made our European fathers move over here. Stands to reason something will make us leave again.