No matter who you vote for there are going to be some things done that will harm this Nation deeply... stay safe, stay secure, break out the popcorn and hire a lawyer.

It will be the patriotic thing to do to protect this country!

Though I won't be voting for either Obama or Clinton, I have to disagree with the statement "McCain has something both Democratic candidates lack: meaningful experience."

He has experience in terms of the Legislative branch of government. He is the only GOP candidate with NO EXECUTIVE experience. The last candidate that ran for PotUS that wasn't a governor or VPotUS was Kennedy and his term didn't turn out so well.

As for me .. I don't find anyone in the field (left or right) worth pulling the lever for and I consider myself center-right.

I'll just have to see how the field pans out.

I'm still undecided. We already know that McCain has no intention of honoring the oath he will take to "support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," and that he'll be far more conciliatory to the Democrats than he will be an aggressive advocate for about 90% of the reasons I have supported Republicans in the past. If he spent just a fraction of the time hammering Democrats for their positions that he did fighting the people on his side of the aisle, I'd have reason to believe he could be an effective advocate for at least one value I have. His pledge to nominate conservative judges rings hollow in light of the Gang of 14. His willingness to compromise conservative principles in the interests of making deals with Democrats makes his pledge to pursue the War on Terror in the face of domestic opposition suspect.

The two best reasons I can think of to vote for him are 1) he might appoint judges who will interpret law rather than make it up, and 2) he's not Hillary or Obama.

Just once again in my life, I'd like to vote for a Republican for president on the basis of leadership and principle, something positive, rather than the conviction that it's more important to keep the other candidate from winning.

Nope. Na ga da.

Glad to see you aren't going to let spite be your number one factor in who to vote (or not vote) for president. Me, I'm voting for the President who will let the generals decide when is the right time to withdraw troops from Iraq.

Nah, I'm still writing-in Fred. McCain will have to win without my vote.

Lets just come to grips with the fact that a liberal will occupy 1600 Penn some 2009.

Conservatism for all its bold talk is essentially dead. The GOP and Bush killed it.

When you have the choice between a Democrat and a Democrat, the Democrat will win. I am going with the Democrat.

I find it amazing that government can change the heavens, if we give them enough tax dollars for CO2 abatement, but can't enforce the border. Tells you a lot about what government can really do, and taxes they do best.

If John McCain wants to know what his real November problem is, just look at this statistic on primary turnout -- Democrats for their top three candidates 25 million, Republicans for their top 6 candidates, 12 million. And that is why the Democrat will win.

Bush killed the GOP? The spineless congress who let the minority dems control them for two years had nothing to do with it? The GOP voters who stayed home to "teach everyone a lesson" had nothing to do with it?

It's easy to blame Bush - everyone does it - much harder to look at the thing broadly and realize that there were screwups down the line, starting with the fact that the superconservatives on the right who are still crying for Fred (who didn't want it) knew back in '04 that they would need a candidate in '08 and did nothing about it.

So if you want to know who destroyed the GOP look in the mirror. It was a group effort.

I've been voting in presidential elections since 1968. In all that time I've only voted FOR a candidate twice. Every other time, my vote was cast to keep the other yokel out of office.

I voted FOR Reagan second term, after voting AGAINST Carter before that. I voted FOR Bush senior first term becasue I fugured he'd see how successful Reagan had been and keep doing the same things. He didn't, so I ended up voting AGAINST Clinton in '92.

Sometimes, in my case - most times, you have to settle and figure out which candidate is the least distasteful. That will be McCain.

Here's another McCain slogan against the Dems:
"Clinton vs McCain - Who do you thing Osama Bin Laden is rooting for?".
or
"Obama vs McCain - Who do you thing Osama Bin Laden is rooting for?".

BOB--

I love ya! and I disagree with you. I will not vote for John McCain. Your argument for McCain is lacking any real substance. In fact, you could have saved yourself some time and just wrote, "I'm voting republican."

While McCain has experience, and is basically our only choice, why go public with such an ringing endorsement of him? You didn't sway me. In fact, you reminded me of just how depressing things look.

And if I really wanted to be cynical, which I do, I'd argue everything you wrote is more of an argument against him than it is for him. He's been in Washington for 25 years. He hasn't given any real thought to his governing philosophy. And he's entrenched in Washington politics. And he loves reaching across the isle. All arguments, in my opinion that should just as easily disqualify him.

Here's why. With a McCain presidency he will accomplish bipartisan--global warming taxes and regulation, bipartisan Amnesty, bipartisan ban on drilling for our own oil, and probably bipartisan tax increases by letting Bush's tax cuts expire.

So you see, all you really had to write was, "I endorse John McCain because he's the only republican on the ballot. Period. End of story.

But instead, you are reaching for anything you can find to make yourself feel better. Which I don't blame you for trying to do. But I just thought you should know your argument isn't exactly grounded in any real substance. I still love ya!

Sparky, I have some bumper stickers from 2004 left:

"WWOVF? Who Would Osama Vote For"

Want one?

AndyB:

"I endorse John McCain because he's (almost certainly going to be) the best candidate on the ballot."

Is that simple enough for you?

So if McCain tacks towards the center after getting the nomination, that means he will be moving to the right? It would be about time.

Although I'm not quite as pessimistic as you are relative to what McCain will do if elected, I do share a number of your feelings about him. However, for much the same set of reasons as yourself, I will vote for him. Earlier this morning I sent his campaign a fair sized contribution as well.

There really isn't any alternative for anybody who supoported Reagan or claims to have supported him. At this point, only McCain potentially will support programs leading to strong national security and a Judiciary amenable to interpreting, rather than making Law.

If liberal judges are going to be seated, I'd rather they be appointed by someone who is not a Republican. Sorry, I can't for the man, and my vote will not be assumed by the GOP.

McCain is not my 1st choice... far from it, but if he's the Republican nominee, I'll send dough, I'll stuff envelopes, I'll put a sign in the yard, etc, etc...
I was on active duty at the Pentagon when RR was President and nothing made me feel better on my morning runs than seeing the flag wave over the White House as I circled the Washington Monument... but RR was no plaster saint, no perfect idol or image, he was a real man AND a real politician... he made compromises, he made deals, he did not demonize anyone (let alone a fellow Republican), and he mattered...
Those of you who are willing to turn this blessed nation over to President Hillary Clinton (if that didn't make you throw up a little, check your pulse) or a shallow, feel-good, "change" guy, are not conservatives, not libertarians, not good Americans... you are venal, narrow, and essentially unpatriotic...
These are the times that try men's souls... why are you so eager to be found wanting??

TO: Bob Owens
RE: Vote for McCain?

"I cannot drum up any enthusiasm to vote for him in November.

But I will." -- Bob Owens

Well....

....it's a free country.

However, I cannot vote for him. Despite the fact that I am a co-chair of my Republican county precinct.

Something to do with an oath he and I both took when we took on our commissions as officers in the Armed Forces of the United States. Something to do with that clause about....

....uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And to bear true faith and allegiance to the same."

You see, when he got McCain-Feingold through he attacked the Bill of Rights; a major part of the Constitution of the United States that he swore to 'uphold and defend'.

He may have had that beaten out of him during his tenure at the Hanoi Hilton. That is a shame.

However, I have not forgotten that and I cannot support someone who has attacked the Bill of Rights in such an egregious manner. It would make me as much of an oath-breaker as HE is.

And that is NOT part of MY 'constitution'. I keep my oaths.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[McCain served US better in the Hanoi Hilton than in the US Senate. He should go back there and serve US better, again.]

TO: Jagcap
RE: Soooo....

"Those of you who are willing to turn this blessed nation over to President Hillary Clinton (if that didn't make you throw up a little, check your pulse) or a shallow, feel-good, "change" guy, are not conservatives, not libertarians, not good Americans... you are venal, narrow, and essentially unpatriotic..." -- jagcap

....did you 'forget' your oath of office too? Or did you find a legal loophole?

I don't care much for Hillary OR Obama either, but they are not oath-breakers, like McCain.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Let all the poisons of the Earth hatch out. -- Emperor Claudius, from Claudius, the God]

Anyone hoping that McCain will nominate conservative judges has just not been paying attention. McCain will compromise with the opposition to achieve another political expediency.

I will not vote dor a democrat, even if he does wear an (R) on his sleeve.

I, too, will write in "Fred".

jagcap,
do not concur. they are putting principle over politics. vent on the party not them.

steve cpo usnr ret.

TO: Bob Owens and jagcap, et al.
RE: REALLY???!??

"McCain for President. Or we're really screwed." -- Bob Owens

And what leads you to the idea that an oath-breaker will not screw you more than the others?

Ever hear of the term 'moral turpitude'? How about 'prima facia evidence'?

Maybe jagcap can help you out with those terms.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Fool me once....fool me twice.]

"This election is too important for that."
I'm sorry, but as I get older so does that line. Every two years since I've been an adult I've heard that (yes, they say it on every Congressional cycle, too). Every two years: "THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES". More important than when we fought the Nazis or the Soviets. Every cycle, this cycle is just too damn important to care about principles--I mean how important are your principles gonna be when we're all lying dead in the street because you voted for THEM?
I'm sorry, no. I detest the Clintons as much as the next guy, but they were in the White House for 8 years, and we're still here to laugh at them. I will not vote for McCain. He is a man without integrity, he stabs his party in the back to advance his own interests, he despises the free market, and he would cheerfully sacrifice our First Amendment liberties in exchange for a glowing review in the NYT. Enough. If the party is willing, as it increasingly seems to be, to trash the base in order to advance McCain, well, then, good luck, but you'll do it without my help.

Nice post Jagcap.

I am an independent, but in this race I cannot see voting for anyone but the Republican nominee.

How Romney acts when McCain's nomination becomes a given will show his true character. I assume that he will rise above many of his supporters.

Chuck says: "[McCain served US better in the Hanoi Hilton than in the US Senate. He should go back there and serve US better, again.]"

I seriously doubt that anyone writing such venomous and disgusting words ever served as a "co-chair of a Republican precinct." More likely these are the brain farts of a member of the BDS squad of moonbats out on a web-surfing trip.

McCain can't mobilize or excite his base. He's toast whether you vote for him or not. In the unlikely event it looks close in November in Florida, I'll probably vote for him. Otherwise, I'll look for a third party candidate who espouses conservative values.

TO: Terry
RE: Doubt All You Want....

"I seriously doubt that anyone writing such venomous and disgusting words ever served as a "co-chair of a Republican precinct." -- Terry

....but you can cofirm it with the Colorado GOP.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[I'm a Republican. Not an automaton.]

It's simple:

McCain wins, we fight the war to win.

Clinton/Obama wins , we lose the war.

Any questions?

bill-tb: "When you have the choice between a Democrat and a Democrat, the Democrat will win. I am going with the Democrat."

Rich: "I will not vote dor a democrat, even if he does wear an (R) on his sleeve."

The lack of serious, genuine discourse by those who betray the fundamental principle of pragmatic compromise inherent in Reagan Conservatism is very telling. Just watch what when these so called conservatives find out that McCain's 2000 Presidential Campaign Co-Chair (AKA: Fred) has endorsed McCain.

TO: Peter
RE: Yeah

"Any questions?" -- Peter

Where's your evidence to support your claim?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. We've lost wars before...and we're still here.

But I admit to the fact I moved OUT of Denver since 9/11.

I am the last of the Eisenhower Republicans. I swallowed my pride to vote for Reagan--despite those monster deficits. I am sick of the neo-con whining about McCain. Leave the party, stay home, just go away for God's sake. John McCain is a true American hero and has my full, enthusiastic support.

Wow, I've seen some stupid comments in my time, but Pelto's about takes the cake.

Last I studied civics says the Judicial Branch has had the power to deem a law constitutional or not since Marbury vs. Madison in 1803. I wasn't aware Chuck Pelto had been given the right to usurp this authority. Unless I'm mistaken, this bill was passed by a 60-40 majority, signed by a GOP president, and upheld by the Supreme Court. Exactly what part of civics class did I miss that makes this process unconstitutional?

Give me a break. McCain-Feingold may be bad law. You might not like it at all. But it's certainly no violation of McCain's oath - either as a military officer or a Senator - to vote for or against it. To impugn McCain's POW experience is jackassery in the extreme.

I am the last of the Eisenhower Republicans (I think). I swallowed my pride to vote for Reagan--despite those monster deficits. I am sick of the neo-con whining about McCain. Leave the party, stay home, just go away for God's sake. John McCain is a true American hero and has my full, enthusiastic support.

Clinton/Obama wants to surrender.
McCain doesn't.

What part of that does your MDS infected brain not understand, Chuck?

McCain lost me (and the Republican ticket lost my vote) with "Patriotism over Profits". Screw him, and any other cheapshot chickenhawker. Bad enough I have to listen to that from Terry McAuliffe or MoveOn.org, I'll be g-d'd if I'm going to listen to it from my own party's nominee.

John McCain shivved his own party every chance he got in the Senate. How can anyone reasonably expect him to change his behavior with the Bully Pulpit at his disposal? Some signing actions to expect in President McCain's first 100-days:

1. Fairness Doctrine Enshrinement Act.
2. McCain-Feingold Extension/Enlargement Act.
3. Kennedy-McCain proxy Alien Amnesty Act.
4. McCain proxy-Lieberman Cap-n-Trade Act.
5. Repeal-the-Bush-Tax-Cuts Act.
6. Close-Gitmo-and-No-Waterboarding Act.
7. Telco-Liability-for-FISA Reinstatement Act.
8. The ANWR Permanent Closure Act.

He'll nominate conservative judges? You say, but he'll be sure to be seen consulting with his
"good friend Senator" (name any Democrat here) on any nominees.

Sorry, I can't in good conscience vote for the man, I couldn't stand the disappointment.

Didn't Bush break his oath to uphold the Constitution by signing McCain-Feingold into law? Wasn't Bush ready and willing to sign McCain-Kennedy into law?

If those who refuse to vote for McCain want to be truly honest, what they should be saying is "I won't vote for another George W. Bush". And if they were truly honest, they would've stayed home in '04.

But they're not honest, and they're not patriots. Their love of conservatism takes precedence over their love of country. They know that, if nothing else, McCain would be stronger in dealing with America's enemies than any Democrat, but that's not enough for them. Shame on them. They're no better than Susan Sarandon.

TO: Roy Mustang
RE: What Part....

"What part of that does your MDS infected brain not understand, Chuck?" -- Roy Mustang

....of "He broke his promise in the past, why should we trust him in the future," do YOU not understand, my fine obtuse friend.

You trust someone who has lied to you in the past? That's YOUR problem. Not mine.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[He broke his promise to his wife. Why should I trust him? -- President Harry S. Truman, on firing a member of his cabinet for adultery]

Fred voted for McCain-Feingold. And he's still 1 million times better than you back stabbing, so called Reagan Conservatives.

TO: The Fop
RE: Good Point

"Didn't Bush break his oath to uphold the Constitution by signing McCain-Feingold into law? Wasn't Bush ready and willing to sign McCain-Kennedy into law?" -- The Fop

And if I'd known that in 2004, before I started paying closer attention in 2006, I'd have not voted for HIM either.

Regards,

Chuck(le)

I may just go back to voting Libertarian. It never really seems to matter who wins, the outcome is always the same. Bigger government, higher spending.

I voted Bush twice and what did I get? New bureaucracies (Homeland Security), new entitlement programs (Rx drugs) and completely unrestrained Republican earmarks.

Would everyone quit moaning about McCain. Jeez, you sound like a bunch of Dimmocrats! Let's consider a few things about McCain. He supported McCain Feingold, Sarbanes-Oxley, Amnesty, but was strong on seeing the Iraq war through...oh no, wait, all of that actually describes Bush. Seriously, I hear Hannity in paroxisms over McCain and how he's not like Reagan and I want to just laugh. Has he been paying attention at all for the last eight years? Other than tax cuts, hardly anything Bush has done would be called Reaganesque, including the Iraq invasion (Reagan prefered supporting indigenous forces to outright invasion for anything larger than Granada). Put the hankies down, folks. McCain is a more fiscally responsible, and more socially liberal (though pro-life) version of Bush, plus he's far less vulnerable to media attacks. If you'll get behind Bush with any fervor, and most of us did in 2000 and 2004, then McCain should be an easy sell.

You'll vote for McCain because he has more experience. I won't vote for him for the same reason, I know from his record he is likely to do the opposite of what I think he should. When someone has a habit of doing the wrong thing time after time you stop voting for him, you don't assume he's smarter than you and ignore everything but party loyalty.

Yeah, McCain is lying about wanting to win in Iraq. Do you actually believe that?

You're the liar, Chuck. Stop lying to yourself and admit McCain wants to win to the War. That’s the first step in curing your MDS.

"McCain served US better in the Hanoi Hilton than in the US Senate. He should go back there and serve US better, again."

Pelto: Grow up, and learn some class.

Diffus are you serious? McCain has done more than his part in defending the constitution and this country. Just because he's not as conservative as you'd like doesn't mean he is less committed to the constitution. Get over it.

Wow Chuck. I took the oath to suuport and defend as well, but I guess if disagree with you I am an oath breaker? You may not like McCain-Feingold, but it is up to the Supreme Court to decide if it violates the Consitution. The Income Tax isn't in the Constitution either, what does that make its supporters? Suppose I supported Prohibition, or what if I supported Prohibitions repeal? I don't like McCain-Feingold, but I also hate seeing George Soros being able to spend unlimited $$$ in an election cycle. Unfortunately, M-F did not fix that and was poor legislation.
Nobody gets their perfect candidate. Chuck get off your butt and run and see what it is like. We have a 2 party system, compromise is a requirement. Nobody gets everything they want, but hopefully enough of the 'right' stuff gets done.

"McCain served US better in the Hanoi Hilton than in the US Senate. He should go back there and serve US better, again."

Good god. I'm just going to ignore you. Come back when you want to participate in the discussion in good faith.

"McCain served US better in the Hanoi Hilton than in the US Senate. He should go back there and serve US better, again."

Good god, Chuck. I'm just going to ignore you. Come back when you want to participate in the discussion in good faith.

I'm voting Republican.

I think what is missing from this discussion is a hard-headed assessment of the damage a democrat will inflict. The pace of change is increasing exponentially. The idea that we should let Hillary make a mess that someone will be able to fix later is unrealistic. Packing the supreme court with liberal judges will not be fixable. Losing the mid east to Jihadists will not be fixable. To accept these consequences because McCain is too left on campaign finance or immigration is suicidal.

I think conservative republicans who say they will sit this election out or vote for a democrat are insane!

Wake up. No nominee is perfect. McCain has good points and bad. The deciding factor is that most republicans agree with his positions about 80% of the time. Most republicans agree with either democrat about 10% of the time.

To conservative cry babies I say: Suck it up and get back in the game. We need you. The country needs you. Do the right thing and support the republican candidate for president.

Doug Santo
Pasadena, CA

For the life of me I cannot understand the logic of voting against the candidate who agrees with you on some of the issues in favor of voting for (or sitting out) for the one who outwardly loathes you. McCain sucks, but he doesn't even approach the level of suckitude that the other side of the aisle will give us.

Mark S,
Uh,...AMENDMENT XVI
Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.

Note: Article I, section 9, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 16.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

BTW there are no supporters of the Income Tax allowed on this site. Am I right, Bob?

Vote for McCaine, he's the most semi-conservative sounding Liberal on the ballot! :-)

"Our guy may suck, but the other guy sucks worse" wasn't effective in 1996, and if it hadn't been for fewer than 100,000 people in Ohio, it wouldn't have worked in 2004. I doubt it'll work in 2008.

Our problem is that we're deciding which candidate we think is the least objectionable; Democrats are deciding which of two candidates they like better. That's a recipe for disaster.

Another point which deserves some consideration: I knew what Reagan's philosophy of government was whe I voted for him; I knew what George H.W. Bush at least said his philosophy of government was when I voted for him; I knew what George W. Bush's philosophy of government was when I voted for him. I know what Clinton's and Obama's philosophy of government is. I do not know what John McCain's philosophy of government is, and I'm not sure he has one.

"Our guy may suck, but the other guy sucks worse" wasn't effective in 1996, and if it hadn't been for fewer than 100,000 people in Ohio, it wouldn't have worked in 2004. I doubt it'll work in 2008.

Our problem is that we're deciding which candidate we think is the least objectionable; Democrats are deciding which of two candidates they like better. That's a recipe for disaster.

Another point which deserves some consideration: I knew what Reagan's philosophy of government was when I voted for him; I knew what George H.W. Bush at least said his philosophy of government was when I voted for him; I knew what George W. Bush's philosophy of government was when I voted for him. I know what Clinton's and Obama's philosophy of government is. I do not know what John McCain's philosophy of government is, and I'm not sure he has one.

Greg,

You are absolutely correct, in my zeal to disagree with Chuck I didn't complete my thought. My point being that it wasn't in the Constitution originally or in the Bill of Rights. Upon passage it was not oveturned by the Supreme Court.

You have to tax in some way. Personally, I like the idea of NO payroll tax and everyone writes a check, preferably for the entire year at one time...talk about a tax revolt!

Regardless of the means by which one collects taxes, McCain will not try to confiscate as much of our money as the HRC or BHO...

I won't be voting FOR McCain; I'll be voting AGAINST Hillary or Obama. That's well worth doing, people.

Greg,

Absolutley correct, in my zeal to disagree with Chuck I didn't complete my thought. Income Tax was not part of Constitution or Bill of Rights.

You have to collect taxes somehow, personally I prefer requiring payment by check annually with NO payroll withholding. That would get a real tax revolt started.

One thing I am pretty sure of, McCain will confiscate less of our dollars than either Clinton or Obama.

McCain or we're really screwed. That about says it. After all, as others have said, you go to war with the force you have, not the force you want to have. If we can get him firmly on the record viz tax cuts and the supreme court, I can cheerfully vote for the guy (while glumly considering the alternatives).

Mark S,
Absolutely.

Simple concept. If you - as a Republican - do not vote for McCain or write in a candidate, there is only one beneficiary and that is the Democratic nominee.

Voting for the "lesser of two evils" is not the way to look at it. If you do not vote for McCain in the general election (write in a candidate or, for whatever reason vote Democratic), then you are voting for the greater of the two evils.

So, if you are serious in your desire to not vote for the Republican nominee, then I for one do not want to hear you complain or whine over the next 4-8 years.

Two things...

1. GW Bush isn't running for President.
2. Supreme Court sez McCain-Feingold passes constitutional muster.

The following were "true American heroes", too -- doesn't mean I'd vote for any of them for dogcatcher:

Timothy McVeigh: GWI -- Bronze Star, honorable discharge.
Duke Cunningham: Vietnam -- Navy Cross, Silver Star (2), Air Medal (15), Purple Heart. Ace credited with 5 MiG kills.
John Kerry: Vietnam -- Silver Star, Purple Heart (3).

--furious

I'm not jumping for joy over McCain either but he was my second choice after Thompson. Anybody who has seen this video would have to rule out Romney. There is no explanation that justifies his trying to get to the left of Teddy Kennedy on just about every issue. No real conservative would (should?) want to get into office that badly.

As for McCain nobody brings up the fact if he wins he will be the biggest spending hawk in the White House since Calvin Coolidge. It is clear he doesn't understand taxes, regulation or the first amendment, but he is right on spending.

The great Bill Whittle said it better than I ever could:

"After seven years of watching and fighting against Americans who wish to see the country suffer so that they can get at George Bush, the last thing I wanted or expected to see was conservatives saying they would rather see the country suffer than support John McCain over Clinton or Obama, so that they can "get the blame."

A retreat before victory is assured in Iraq cannot be undone in 2012. And mandatory, single-payer, universal health care, once established, will not EVER go away either.

I am not impugning anyone's motives. I believe I have a reasonable understanding of principled behavior. But if your goal is to see the country punished because---

You can stop right there. If your goal is to see America punished, and her people open to attack and/or ruined financially in order to prove a point for any reason, then you do not deserve politial power nor are you likely to achieve it."

"It is clear [McCain] doesn't understand taxes, regulation or the first amendment..."

...and your point is...?

TO: Roy Mustang
RE: Careful, Buckie

"You're the liar, Chuck. Stop lying to yourself and admit McCain wants to win to the War. That’s the first step in curing your MDS." -- Roy Mustang

Calling people a liar is not particularly conducive to cordial relations.

So enough with your ignorant stupidity.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Stupid, adj., ignorant and proud of it.]

James,

1) McCain-Feingold

2) "I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt."

Of course, it's hard to find a politician these days who really believes in the Constitution, but such a cavalier attitude about the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment clearly is at odds with the oath of office.

TO: All
RE: So....

....Romney is 'dropping out'?

Interesting. At this early a stage, Fred and Mitt have both thrown in the proverbial towel.

Well....if they stay out, I guess they didn't 'pack the gear' necessary to be the chief-executive nor the commander-in-chief in the land.

That'll leave McCain, which means, as I see it, the Democrats will win the White House.

The fall-out is interesting to consider.

Whomever wins, Clinton, Barack, or McCain, I'll sport a bumper sticker on my Jeep Scrambler that reads, "Don't Blame Me. I voted for Opus."

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[I told you I'd do it. WHHHHYyyy didn't you believe me? -- Burl Ives, after shooting his son, played by Chuck Conners, in The Big Country]

P.S. He got an Oscar, back when it really meant something, for his role in that great movie.

My Fellow Conservatives, a vote is not a moral action, not a vow, an oath or a contract. It does not involve principles. It is merely the making of a pragmatic choice between, in this case, two people, Clinton/Obama or McCain. Very rarely does one have the luxury of choosing someone you'd approve of as an in-law, let alone a soulmate! Nor is there any guarantee that such a rarity would act according to your shared ideals once elected and faced with the cat's cradle of dilemmas inseparable from the act of governing.

A negative vote - to exclude a distasteful alternative - is not only valid but by far the most common in a democracy. No principle is betrayed nor can it be bcos no principle is involved. It is simply the exercise of common sense. Remember, even in the moral sphere, the avoidance of vice is a necessary preliminary to the embrace of virtue.

I am from Ireland and have no say in what will happen, but I beg you all, 'screw your courage to the sticking place' and move might and main to elect a Republican next November, if not for yourselves then for the rest of us. The world will be a safer and a better place.

As for Ronald Reagan - so much conjured with of late - he was always Irishman enough to know that a sensible decent compromise is far preferable on every level to a principled leap into the abyss. He stood shoulder to shoulder with Gerald Ford in '76 and if America had followed his lead all of us would have been spared the disaster of the Carter Administration.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to relive it.

P.P.S. ERRATA...

Make that....

Don't blame me. I voted for Bill and Opus.

P.P.P.S. I actually get to work with [the inspiration] for Bill once a month. He taught engineering to Berke.....and he does look like him, save the diapers. This guy wears a suit.

TO: Liam Hodder
RE: What a Crock!

"My Fellow Conservatives, a vote is not a moral action, not a vow, an oath or a contract. It does not involve principles." -- Liam Hodder

A choice that will decide on the people who will be judges in the land is not a 'moral action'?

Unprincipled voting?

That has got to be one of the most stupid comments I've seen in a VERY long time.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Those who would treat politics and morality apart will never understand the one or the other. -- John, Viscount Morley of Blackburn]

Blacks vote for the Dems no matter how bad they are treated and we call that stupid.

And then conservatives do the EXACT same thing and support (R)ino's no matter what. we vote for the Jumpin' Johnny types over and over and can't figure out why we don't get better candidates.

All we have is the power of the vote. If we withhold that vote often enough, so we no longer can be taken for granted, we will get better candidates.

If you hold your nose and vote for McCain, you LOSE your right to complain about how lousy a job he does. You know that going in. NO EXCUSE.

To Chuck Pelto

If you wish to respond, respond to the full post rationally. Don't just abuse. Point out the flaws in my reasoning that a vote for McCain is the only reasonable option considering the alternative. And, Chuck, if you wish to quote authorities at me, choose a homegrown American one, not an English Lord. The English practice of politics in Ireland, I can assure you, was and is utterly divorced from morality.

As a Sgt in the Marine Corps, and an OIF Vet, I find Chuck's comment about sending John McCain to serve his country back at the "Hanoi Hilton" extremely distasteful and offensive as a fellow war veteran.

I too disagree with many of his domestic policy actions and feel uneasy about pulling the lever for him, but to suggest that he served his better as a POW when he has proven his loyalty and willingness to serve his country, goes far beyond the average citizen or politician for that matter.

That quote was just disgusting.

Shame on you, Sir.

Sgt Chris
USMC OIF 2005-2006

I agree that on so many issues there is barely a sliver of light between McCain and either Democrat contender. But let me tell you what resides within that sliver of light: the one candidate who will NOT be fixing a great big target onto the backs of my two sons in the U.S. military. One son is in Iraq now, flying a transport helicopter. When Clinton or Obama makes the decision to pull the troops out before their mission is done, he could be among the last ones out of the country during the months and months it will take to end our presence, as the swarms of jihadist jackals are massing to slaughter both our troops and the new Iraqi allies they have worked so hard to befriend. Remember that ignominious scene on the roof of the American embassy in Saigon? The Democrats WANT that scene to play again -- they have done so for five years now. Sit this election out, or write in Fred (whom I much admire), or be the ultimate turn-Coulter and support the Democrat, and YOU will have a hand in replaying that scene -- YOU will fix a target on my kids' backs, and those of every other dedicated member of our military. If President McCain makes you a little queasy, try dealing with the Democratic president who will usher in Killing Fields Two.

TO: Sgt Chris
RE: Offensive?

"As a Sgt in the Marine Corps, and an OIF Vet, I find Chuck's comment about sending John McCain to serve his country back at the "Hanoi Hilton" extremely distasteful and offensive as a fellow war veteran." -- Sgt Chris

Well....

....as one superior officer described my sense of 'tact'....

He attacked.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. When I set aside by sergeant stripes and took on my lieutenant bars, I did not set aside my sense of commitment to telling the unvarnished truth.

Romney 2012!

"If you hold your nose and vote for McCain, you LOSE your right to complain about how lousy a job he does. You know that going in. NO EXCUSE."

Since when? This is still America where "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances" still applies, without loopholes! As Americans, we can ALWAYS complain about the idiots we elect and hope to nudge them in the proper direction...
In this election, we'll have to choose between Dhimmicrats who don't understand what's going on in the world and a "maverick" Republican who doesn't play nice, has way too high an opinion of himself, and has made some tooth-achingly bad policy decisions...
In which alternate reality can choosing the Dhimmicrat possibly be a rational choice? So not only will I enthusiastically send my dough, pick up my yard sign, man the phone bank, and encourage other great American Republicans to do what's necessary, I may, for the first time in my life, put a political bumpersticker on my car...

TO: Winefred
RE: Maybe....

"If President McCain makes you a little queasy, try dealing with the Democratic president who will usher in Killing Fields Two." -- Winefred

....if we're lucky and McCain, as President, does not break his 'promise' to Americans.

However, as I've pointed out before, and will continue to do so, he HAS broken a 'promise' deeper than anything politicians say on the campaign trail, already.

Why people cannot grasp that is beyond my ken.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Pray to God that you're right.....for your sons and everyone elses sake.

But if you're wrong.....what then?

Chuck,

I question if you have ever served anything or anyone other than yourself.
Rarely have I seen someone so fully and totally commit themselves to idiocy and pull it off so completely and quickly.

Liam, well said.

""This election is too important for that."
I'm sorry, but as I get older so does that line. Every two years since I've been an adult I've heard that..."

Well, my friend, the truth doesn't become a lie just because politicians repeat it. The truth is that this ole world of our's keeps getting more and more integrated, interdependent and dangerous. You may wish it was different and folks in Hell may wish they had ice water, but that doesn't mean that either one is gonna happen.
The world relies too much on American being the only grown-up nation for us to throw a temper tantrum. Grow up!

Chuckles - You have beclowned yourself with each of your disgusting comments. Have you no honor, sir?

“If you wish to respond, respond to the full post rationally.” -- Liam Hopper

I did respond. And I responded rationally.

“Don't just abuse.” -- Liam Hopper

I didn’t just abuse.

“Point out the flaws in my reasoning that a vote for McCain is the only reasonable option considering the alternative.” -- Liam Hopper

I did point out my reasoning. Albeit in the tag line.

You cannot separate, as you suggested a (1) vote and (2) principles.

“And, Chuck, if you wish to quote authorities at me, choose a homegrown American one, not an English Lord.” -- Liam Hopper

What’s THIS? Never heard of English Common Law?

When did you graduate from high school?

Didn’t they teach you that John Locke—an English philosopher—inspired the likes of Samuel Adams?

I guess you never cared much for Shakespeare, either. Despite his uncanny ability to bring out the truth of the human condition.

“The English practice of politics in Ireland, I can assure you, was and is utterly divorced from morality.” -- Liam Hopper

Your pejorative hatred is showing, Liam. Get over it. Or I’ll pour myself a Black and Tan and toast you....

Regards,

Chuck(le)

P.S. But, in deference to your request for a non-English[man] tag-line....

[He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard for his country. There is seldom an instance of a man guilty of betraying his country, who had not before lost the feeling of moral obligations in his private connections. -- Samual Adams]

I think the Father of the American Revolution has tagged McCain.....

....as his public life is, obviously in light of McCain-Feingold, corrupt. I think we can safely conjecture on other aspects.

Chuck(les)
You have well and truly beclowned yourself, gone out on a limb and sawn it off after yourself. Ah well, we are all but human and, sometimes, prone to (especially) rhetorical excess. Nevertheless, where there is life, there is hope, and I hope you will reflect, reconsider & repent (this is America, so we don't require recanting) and stand with us in opposing the forces of Dhimmicratitude

TO: Terry
RE: Oh....

"Chuckles - You have beclowned yourself with each of your disgusting comments. Have you no honor, sir?" -- Terry

....probably more than you.

Are you 'calling me out'?

I chose IFVs with a full load of munitions and crew and a fire-team of 4th Infantry Division infantry; combat vets. Place, Pinion Canyon Maneuver Area. Time oh-dark-hundred.....

Care to get back ON-TOPIC? Or do you wish to continue with ad homs?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[I honor and express all facets of my being, regardless of state and local laws.]

I posted this in the comments as Ace...

If you live in a state that has not yet had its primary, it is time to seriously consider voting for Hillary on primary day. I know that is an unpardonable sin, but hear out my logic.

1. McCain is going to be the nominee and he doesn't need our votes for that. He's proven that. None of us want to vote for him anyway. A vote for one of the guys who has already dropped out is a waste. A symbolic waste at best.

2. If Hillary gets the nomination, McCain can beat her.

3. If Obama gets the nomination McCain will lose. Obama has too much momentum. People are jumping on his bandwagon in droves for no apparant reason. He's the candidate with sex appeal and McCain can not compete with that. It won't be about the issues. It will be about the millions of irrational Americans who will vote for Obama because he smiles and says lots of nice Hallmark worthy phrases.

So there you have it. Let's get Hillary the nomination so we can stop Obama.

That is all. Carry on.

TO: jagcap
RE: Beclowning?

"You have well and truly beclowned yourself, gone out on a limb and sawn it off after yourself. Ah well, we are all but human and, sometimes, prone to (especially) rhetorical excess." -- jagcap

Well....

....at least I'm not so obviously guilty of plagiarism, counselor.

Or are you part-and-parcel of a multiple personality that is also associated with Terry?

I've heard what the 'rarified' atmosphere in the Puzzle Palace can get you.

But the point still remains that McCain fomented an attack on the Bill of Rights. And you, if you ARE a fellow officer of the Armed Forced of the United States, seem to not give a 'thought' to that.

So be it, counselor. But I suspect you are projecting when you make your claim of 'beclowned' and 'prone to rhetorical excess'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Lawyer, n., One skilled at circumventing the law. Ambrose Beirce, The Devil's Dictionary]

TO: jagcap
RE: Beclowning?

"You have well and truly beclowned yourself, gone out on a limb and sawn it off after yourself. Ah well, we are all but human and, sometimes, prone to (especially) rhetorical excess." -- jagcap

Well....

....at least I'm not so obviously guilty of plagiarism, counselor.

Or are you part-and-parcel of a multiple personality that is also associated with Terry?

I've heard what the 'rarified' atmosphere in the Puzzle Palace can get you.

But the point still remains that McCain fomented an attack on the Bill of Rights. And you, if you ARE a fellow officer of the Armed Forced of the United States, seem to not give a 'thought' to that.

So be it, counselor. But I suspect you are projecting when you make your claim of 'beclowned' and 'prone to rhetorical excess'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Lawyer, n., One skilled at circumventing the law. Ambrose Beirce, The Devil's Dictionary]''

P.S. Regarding the Dhimmicrats....

"...stand with us in opposing the forces of Dhimmicratitude." -- jagcap

I've been standing there ever since 1970, counselor.

TO: All
RE: Double-Post

Sorry about that, but this system didn't display the first item after two reloads. So I thought it was lost in the ether.

Liam, you're a man after me own heart, ye are.

Chuckie boy, I'm waiting for you to bring up your Mensa membership. Usually you've done it before now.

To Chuck Pelto

The name's Hodder, Chuck.

As regards Shakespeare, the quotation in my post 'screw your courage to the sticking place' was said by Lady Macbeth to her husband, the eponymous hero of the play 'Macbeth' by, guess who, William Shakespeare.

'pejorative hatred'!!!!!! - as opposed to what, 'laudatory hatred'?

Sam Adams thought John Locke was cool. So what?

Yes, I know about English Common Law. Again, so what?
These are what are called non sequiturs.

You showed the flaws in my reasoning with the tag line 'What a crock'? Now, that's not a non sequitur, Chuck. It's just dumb.

Yes, I graduated from High School. I also got a BA in English and Irish. An MA and PhD in English Literature. (National University of Ireland).

As regards your 'Black and Tan' crack, please, please, Chuck, come over to Ireland and repeat it in any pub of your choosing. I so hope you do.

In Ireland, believe it or not, we have a phrase 'off your chuck'. As in 'Don't take any notice of him, he's off his chuck' meaning he's as crazy as a loon. 'How apt', I hear folk cry. But no, Chuck, you're not crazy you're just as ignorant as me arse.

Chuckles the Clown seems a befittig name...

I don't see many coming to your defense C-dawg...maybe you should consider that?

TO: Mark S
RE: Clown

"I don't see many coming to your defense C-dawg...maybe you should consider that?" -- Mark S

And your point here is.....what?

Something along the lines of I'm a 'minority'?

Big deal. There is a greater justice than running with the proverbial 'herd'. Don't you think?

After all, didn't your mother tell you, "If everyone were jumping off a cliff, would you jump too?"

Hope that helps....but I have my doubts.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Enter by the narrow gate.... -- some Wag, around 2000 year ago.]

The point is that no one is defending your smear of McCain. Your comment about sending him back to Hanoi was over the top and if you really were an Officer and a gentlemen, which it would appear only an act of Congress could make you, you would admit it.

Just to match childish quotations..."a billion Chinamen can't be wrong."

And on that subject, at least we know that McCain would stand up to them, the Chinamen I mean.

TO: Liam HODDER
RE: Still...

...on your ad hom kick, eh?

Can't keep on topic to save your soul? Sounds like a personal problem. And, with such, as I said (above) get over your Irish hatred of the English. Your schitziesque nature is showing in that you first blast me for citing the Vicount of Morley and then hold up Shakespeare to me.

Well...when you care to get off your racist act and get back on topic, I'll be happy to oblige you.

In the meantime.....Here's looking at YOU, kid.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Blow up an Irish castle, you get Blarney Rubble.]

Getting back to the topic at hand. McCain's speech to CPAC is available for your viewing pleasure on Realpolitics.com. Come and sniff (or merely sniff at) the olive branch.

Mark, he loves stirring stuff up. He does this all over the internet. Pretty soon he's going to start bragging about what a great gourmet cook he is, how he knows his wines, other drinks, how he's a double member of Mensa, how he's a Mustang(it's a sure bet no one was happy to be in his unit), on and on and on...Narcissistic Chuck.

TO: Mark S
RE: Sorry to 'Disappoint'

"Your comment about sending him back to Hanoi was over the top and if you really were an Officer and a gentlemen, which it would appear only an act of Congress could make you, you would admit it." -- Mark S

They stopped commissioning officers in the Army as 'gentlemen' the year before I got my commission. Something to do with women graduating from West Point., as I understand it.

RE: The Billion Chinamen

"Just to match childish quotations..."a billion Chinamen can't be wrong." -- Mark S

I prefer the one about

Eat S---! 50 billion flies can't be wrong.

So, if you're a 'fly' sort of guy, step into the booth this November and take a big mouthful.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Time is fun when your having flies.]

TO: Maggie45
RE: Poor Girl

Jealousy does not become you, madam.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it. -- George Washington]

While I agreed with Bush on most of the issues I found his inability to communicate very damaging. How many Americans know Nancy Pelosi was briefed on Waterboarding for example. Bush allowed himself to be hammered day after day by the MSM. He rarely came out to fight. I remember when Reagan would go toe to toe with Sam Donaldson .

How can a McCain victory help conservatives? Only by a massive landslide victory which can perhaps sweep some new Repubs into office. Take back the Foley and Delay seats and hold some of the many seats now at risk. Thats how . We have him, now lets try for a landslide.

These same enthusiastic Libs were just as enthusuastic over McGovern and Dukakis. Obama or Hillary are no better,

Dear Chuck,
when you blow up an Irish castle you normally get ten years but if there are English Lords in it at the time you get a medal.

TO: Liam Hodder
RE: Olive Branches

"Come and sniff (or merely sniff at) the olive branch." -- Liam Hodder

But, as I've commented before, will he hold to it?

Personally, I have my suspicions. Hitler held out an olive branch to Chamberlain. And to Stalin. They accepted them, with dire consequences for 6 million Jewish lives over the next six years and tens of millions of other ethnic backgrounds.

This is not to say McCain is a 'Hitler'. Rather it is to say that many politicians cannot be trusted. As we all well know.

Clinton claimed he 'is' a centrist. Yeah. Right. Depending "on how you define 'is'".

I counsel caution.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Once our friends get into power, they are no longer our friends.]

TO: Liam Hodder
RE: Interesting Point

"when you blow up an Irish castle you normally get ten years but if there are English Lords in it at the time you get a medal." -- Liam Hodder

It was probably an Englishman who came up with that pun.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Put the pun down and back up slowly.....]

P.S. Your indisposition is showing....again.

Maggie,

First time here, I didn't realize he was the resident butt plug. Thanks for the info.

My summer cruise roomate was a POW in Iraq, we used to joke that he could use the humility, until he came back and told us about it and I realized how wrong I was.

McCain in 08! I may disagree with him on some issues, but I rarely agree with Clinton or Obama.

Ahhh, poor Chuckie baby, did I hit a nerve? I think I'm just going to put you on ignore from now on. Except I will be depriving myself of some amusement, actually a lot. You sure do know how to make a fool out of yourself.

I agree absolutely with Winefred, and that's why I will be voting for McCain. Your sons, and your whole family will be in my daily prayers, as are all our military and their families. I have so much awe and respect for you all. May God hold you in the palm of His hand.

With McCain we will be in Iraq for 100 years. If he is elected, I hope you enjoy spending all our money there instead of here

In Mitt Romney's gracious, astute and statesmanlike speech today announcing his withdrawal from the race he called the America 'the hope of the earth'. He's right. It has been so since the Great Potato Famine and is today more than ever.

The rest of us need the US and we need it well-governed, confident, vibrant, strong and determined. And focussed. In a word we need it to be American in all the best and basic meanings of that word. With John McCain we will get all that. With a Democrat - any Democrat - we'll get identity politics, rogue judges, bloated federal programmes and a country too divided and self-absorbed to be the watchman on the hill that the world so needs. In Foreign Affairs the Executive will have one eye on the quasi-pacifist, Woodstockesque, JohnLennonite base and the other busily wooing the discredited, decadent, crypto-Marxist post-nationalist European elite.

Once more, to the disgruntled, though principled, conservatives I say - as Cromwell once said - 'I beseech you, by the bowels of Christ, bethink yourself mistaken'. Or if not mistaken, at least the victims of misdirected ire.

Surely, no Republican who has a head to feel and a heart to think can with peace of mind deliver us to a Democratic Party that has less coherence than a Picasso painting?

PS - Sorry I called you names, Chuck. Only for you this would be a duller place indeed. More rational, mind you, but duller. It's just that you bring out the redhead in me.

Jeez guys. John McCain is about 85% conservative. He is not the end of the world. Yes, I say we need to drill and dont like carbon caps, but at the same time McCain has alot of positives.
1. He has a perfect voting record regarding pork and has been good about spending
2. he is the best canidate period!!! regarding foreign policy.
3. He is a free trade guy
4. He has the best heathcare plan of any remaining canidates (including Romney though he just dropped out)
5. He votes against abortion
6. He doesn't change his positions... he just presents them differently. (unless he genuinly changes his mind). Check it.

In Rebuttle
1. The gang of 14 allowed Alito and Roberts to get on the surpreme court. The Dems fillibuster would have prevented the senate approval otherwise.
2. McCain's experience, while mainly in the legislature, includes the military. He has been a part of actual operations (something no other canidate has). He has also not been corrupted by the legislature unlike many other GOP senators and representatives. This proves that he is ready to lead.

Ian, YOU are a true gentleman.

TO: Maggie45
RE: Do You REALLY....

"Ahhh, poor Chuckie baby, did I hit a nerve?" -- Maggie45

....think that?

And you claim to know me SOOOO 'well'.

Rather, I'm pointing out that I've seen your sort of behavior before. And I recognize it from a LONG ways off.

RE: Get Better

I recommend you get with jagcap. He could teach you a think or two. Ask him about the third option of the Lawyer's Rule, as reported in The Official Rules: A Compendium of Rules and Axioms for Everyday Life.

But for the people who (1) don't have a copy of this great book or (2) the lazy or (3) worse....

Here it is:

[1] If the Law is against you, argue the facts.
[2] If the facts are against you, argue the Law.
[3] If the the Law AND the facts are against you, call the other side names.

Three guesses as to which option you're attempting to apply, here.

Hope that helps.....but....well....YOU know....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Don't worry about me. I've been abused by the best.]

TO: Liam Hodder
RE: The Naming of Names

"Sorry I called you names, Chuck. Only for you this would be a duller place indeed. More rational, mind you, but duller. It's just that you bring out the redhead in me." -- Liam Hodder

Apology accepted.

Not a problem. As I REMINDED Maggie45—if she knows me THAT well—I've been abused by the best. The best being Colonel 'No Slack' Stack. [Note: We almost came to blows once, while I was a company commander in his battaltion.] Great guy. The men would LITERALLY follow him anywhere. And I mean ANYWHERE.

At any rate, we'll see in the long run what transpires. Politics is a convoluted place. And with all things there are advantages and disadvantages to any position—or person in position—you can imagine.

Personally? I have grave doubts as to McCain's integrity. And I'll decide WHO I'll vote for as I step into the booth this November. Things and thinks could change between now and then.

As the saying goes....

A week is a long time in politics. - Harold Wilson

Tip a stout for me, compadre; if that's your pleasure this evening.

I'll have some Bushmills when I return from the committee meeting tonight; for all you crazed Irishmen. It's your kind of fighting-spirit that helped to free US from the tyranny of the English, too.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[A clash of doctrines is not a disaster. It's an opportunity.]

TO: Liam Hodder
RE: The 'Red'!

"It's just that you bring out the redhead in me." -- Liam Hodder

What do you recommend for a good Irish Red?

Also, we probably share some geneology somewhere, from way back around the 700-900 time frame. Nothing either of us would admit to in genteel company. I'm pure-blooded Viking.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. There ya go, Maggie45. Another 'bullet' you can add to all your reasons you 'hate' me.....argh!!!!

[Note: How do you say 'argh' as a Viking? I'll have to contact the embassy in DC....]

TO: Liam Hodder
RE: The 'Red'!

"It's just that you bring out the redhead in me." -- Liam Hodder

What do you recommend for a good Irish Red?

Also, we probably share some geneology somewhere, from way back around the 700-900 time frame. Nothing either of us would admit to in genteel company. I'm pure-blooded Viking.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. There ya go, Maggie45. Another 'bullet' you can add to all your 'magazine' of reasons you 'hate' me.....arrrh!!!!

[Note: How do you say 'arrrh' as a Viking? I'll have to contact the embassy in DC....]

TO: All
RE: Ack!

Another doublet! Dang! What IS this system?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[To have no errors. Would be life without meaning. No struggle, no joy. - Haiku Error Msg]

I like the landslide idea... The Dhimmicrats will be ripping themselves up for the next several months over Billary vs Obama... we'll get to relive all the Clintonian ugliness night after night (how does Karl Rove do it??) and in the meantime we can be positive, forceful and on message... As noted before, McCain has some fence-mending, bridge-building, baby-kissing to do, so let's help him and then get on with it...
Mebbe there are some folks so saturated in McCain disgust/hate/contempt that they won't come along... fine - haters lose... let's win!!
PS Hard for me to appreciate the moral/political sense that characterizes sponsoring legislation passed by majorities of the House & Senate, signed into law by the President, and upheld (at least in part) by the Supreme Court, as an act of vile oath-breaking treason... and I don't think you need two law degrees (neither one from a cracker jack box!!) to figger that one...
PPS Army ROTC, Basic Parachutist Badge; AD '83-'88; MSM (1OLC); AAM; and that rainbow ribbon...

I hear ya, jagcap. Will do.

TO: jagcap
RE: A True 'Lawyer'

"Hard for me to appreciate the moral/political sense that characterizes sponsoring legislation passed by majorities of the House & Senate, signed into law by the President, and upheld (at least in part) by the Supreme Court, as an act of vile oath-breaking treason..." -- jagcap

If we 'all agree' it can't be bad. Even if it IS.

Group-Think at it's 'finest'.

RE: Compare & Contrast

"Army ROTC, Basic Parachutist Badge; AD '83-'88; MSM (1OLC); AAM; and that rainbow ribbon..." -- jagcap

Good on you.

Two tours with 82d Airborne. One, with company command and principal staff officer for logistics at battalion and brigade level and a division chief in the G3 shop with 4th Infantry Division (Mechanize). Enlisted in '70. Commissioned in '75. Went reserve in '87, due to almost punching out an over-baring, megalomaniac with delusions of godhood and stars in his eyes when he was screwing over the lives of the men in my infantry company. [Note: He reminded me too much of Wesley Clark, whom I knew when he was a lieutenant colonel in my brigade. He was a jerk then. He seems to have become more of a jerk as he aged. And....now that it comes to mind. McCain reminds me of Clark too, as I read more about him.] Retired '97 as an LTC.

AIT Combat Engineer, Basic Airborne Course, Jungle Warfare Course, Armorers Course, ROTC (University of Nebraska), IOBC, Air Movement Operations Course, Advanced (Jumpmaster) Airborne Course, Ranger Course, IOAC, Motor Officer Course, CAS3, CGSC, LEDC.

Senior Jump Wings (could have had Master, but that fire in St. Louis toasted my enlisted period records of jumps), Expert Infantry Badge, Ranger Tab, MSM (as a junior-grade captain), ARCOM (3OLC), , NDM, GCM and that rainbow thingie.

So how does a JAG get 2 MSMs?

I got my singleton by doing the best draw, turn-in and accountability of a mech-infantry's set of POMCUS equipment, as the battalion loggie during REFORGER '81. Escaped with my bank account intact. The kids only lost 4 M2 .50 cal headspace & timing gauges and 1 CVC helmet.

But I will tip my hat to the SJA at Bragg. Their Law Day event at St Mere-Eglise DZ got me six jumps. The only thing slowing me down was how long it took me to run from the point of impact back to the place they had the parachutes stacked. And then, back onto a waiting Caribou.

RE: McCain

For those with short term memory loss issues....see my message traffic above for a refresher.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Thanks for the memories.

P.P.S. There's some MORE ammo for you Maggie45....

P.P.P.S. Colonel Stack, God love him, was not the colonel who ruined my active duty career. That was the guy who succeeded him.

Stack was hardly what anyone would describe as an overbaring megalomaniac.

Uh... let's review the basics:
Adherence to the political framework and procedures set forth in the Constitution and interpreted, bent, folded, stapled (and sometimes) mutilated over the last 200 or so years cannot be fairly be described as "If we "all agree"". Compliance with these procedures and relationships, as interpreted by the relevant authorities and as lived by we fortunate few, is necessary prerequisite for the health of our shared constitutional democratic republic, nothing less. You did not pledge your oath to the Constitution according to Chuck, whatever you may think...
MSM #1 wasn't authorized for the job, but my CO got it for me b/c I did job the first week each month and spent the rest of the time looking for other stuff to do. #2 was because I didn't make anyone re-think giving me the Pentagon job...

PPPPPPS Oh yeah, I was a chicken trooper, 5 jumps, over & out!

Good on ya, CY. Winning the war is THE most important issue right now. Anyone who thinks Barry (who'd rather invade Pakistan than complete the job in Afghanistan) or Hillary (whose "team-mate" freed terrorists in exchange for a chunk of votes) has the best interest of our men and women on the ground is deluded.

BillOH - thanks for posting Bill Whittle's comment. Anyone bitching about how "liberal" McCain is needs to read that again (it's sandwiched somewhere between Chuck's 98 comments).

Oh, and Chuck? I think you forgot to put the top back on your paint thinner. Open a window and take a few deep breaths.

It's an internet trope that I really hate to invoke, but it really seems as if we'd all be a little better of if we didn't feed the troll.

(and I'd be a little better OFF if I proofread something once in a while...)

Chuckle's off his meds again...

Lovely. Chuck's off his meds again.

"It's simple:

"McCain wins, we fight the war to win."

Only to allow ourselves to be overrun by an unarmed invasion of maids, dishwashers, chicken pluckers, and gardeners who within 2 generations will bankrupt us and end up fracturing our country along ethnic, cultural, and linguistic lines.

We could get hit a half dozen times by terrosists, and our country would still be recognizable as the USA. What do you think the chances are we will still be an English speaking, free-market, representative republic 50 years from now if McCain gets his way and blows apart what little is left of our borders?

Vote for him and then donate to those causes and activists who expouse those items he's against. Plus if he doesn't do what he says -- he'll be definitely out in 2012, if not sooner and he'll be a very lame duck during his time.

McCain wins, we fight the war to win.

Not likely with the democrats in control of the purse strings. I think the party is over after this year no matter what.

Sigh... I guess I'll vote for him too.

In 1992 I voted for Perot in order to express my dissatisfaction with GHWB. We all know how that turned out.

Yeah, McCain and I don't see eye to eye on many things. But Hillary scares the crap out of me because of what we know about her, and Obama scares the crap out of me because of what we don't know about him.

TO: jagcap
RE: [OT] HEY!!!!

"PPPPPPS Oh yeah, I was a chicken trooper, 5 jumps, over & out!" -- jagcap

Don't sell yourself 'short'.

Anyone crazy enough to step out of a perfectly good airplane in flight can't be ALL bad; by my books.

The ones who are are the ones like that cretin at the O-Club at Fort Irwin, who almost started a brawl between a battalion of tankers and my battalion of paras when he derided the airborne.

At which point a beer can flew across the room and beaned him on the head. That is the head of the armor battalion commander.

Everyone in the room STOOD UP! I looked over and saw the barkeep frantically dialing on the phone.

At this point, a voice from amongst the paras said, "I'm sorry! I'm sorry!" And our battalion chaplain came running out from amongst us and apologized profusely to their battalion commander.

When everyone realized it was the chaplain, we all fell apart laughing our heads off....and all was well.

Later,

Chuck(le)
[God is alive...and airborne qualified. -- Army Chaplain at the Benning School for Boys Airborne Chapel, 1971]

So there you have it. Let's get Hillary the nomination so we can stop Obama.

Posted by T.Ferg at February 7, 2008 03:17 PM

That makes good sense. Sure, I'll need to make sure I vomit before I get to the polling place (wouldn't want to spew in the booth), but I just might do that.

Embrace the suck

Jeez guys. John McCain is about 85% conservative. He is not the end of the world. Yes, I say we need to drill and dont like carbon caps, but at the same time McCain has alot of positives.
1. He has a perfect voting record regarding pork and has been good about spending
2. he is the best canidate period!!! regarding foreign policy.
3. He is a free trade guy
4. He has the best heathcare plan of any remaining canidates (including Romney though he just dropped out)
5. He votes against abortion
6. He doesn't change his positions... he just presents them differently. (unless he genuinly changes his mind). Check it.

In Rebuttle
1. The gang of 14 allowed Alito and Roberts to get on the surpreme court. The Dems fillibuster would have prevented the senate approval otherwise.
2. McCain's experience, while mainly in the legislature, includes the military. He has been a part of actual operations (something no other canidate has). He has also not been corrupted by the legislature unlike many other GOP senators and representatives. This proves that he is ready to lead.

TO: jagcap
RE: Let's Review the Basics

“Adherence to the political framework and procedures set forth in the Constitution and interpreted, bent, folded, stapled (and sometimes) mutilated over the last 200 or so years cannot be fairly be described as "If we "all agree"". Compliance with these procedures and relationships, as interpreted by the relevant authorities and as lived by we fortunate few, is necessary prerequisite for the health of our shared constitutional democratic republic, nothing less.” -- jagcap

I seem to recall, that some time back we had this sort of ‘review of the basics’. Sometime around the 1850s or so. Congress, the President and the Supremes all agreed....

....that Black people were not REALLY human beings. It was referred to as the Dred Scott Decision.

And, as a result of that sort of ‘we all agree’, adherence, 600,000 American lives were expended in something called the American Civil War.

So, counsellor, lets not put too much confidence in ‘we all agree, so it can’t be bad’. History has bloody well proven that it sometimes is VERY bad.

Don’t you think?

RE: That Oath

“You did not pledge your oath to the Constitution according to Chuck, whatever you may think” -- jagcap

Actually, here’s the exact verbiage of the oath commissioned officers like you and I and McCain all took....

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

There’s a very nice item on the web about the oath of office done by one of your brethren at....

http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/c-e/erickson/03/erickson122903.htm

You might find that the plain (if Liam will excuse my use of the term) English says we do take our oath to defend the Constitution of the United States.

Your clever ploy of alleging I pledged my oath TO the Constitution is just fancy ‘footwork’. In this case foot in mouth, counselor. It’s correct, but it does not address the truth of the matter (see oath verbiage, above).

If you wish to argue the point, I’d suggest contacting your fellow JAG officer and discuss it with him.

RE: MSMs

Interesting. But then awards always are more a matter of politics than most would care. I was denied my first ARCOM because the rating officer said, “You did a superb job [the previous officer in the position had suffered a nervous breakdown] and I was considering putting you in for an award, but I didn’t get my first award until I was a captain.”

My MSM was the only one awarded in 4ID(M) for REFORGER 81. And the bulk of the division (2 brigades) had participated in that. Stack got it for me. But I couldn’t get diddly for my NCOIC; a guy whom every SJA officer on Carson came to for advice on Reports of Survey for pecuniary liability.

Go fig....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[With such babbles, men are lead. -- Napoleon]

He has the best health care plan? Tell that to my 12 year old niece when she can't find insurance in a couple of years because she will have used up her lifetime maximum due to congenital kidney problems.

"Sorry, honey, but we're going to have to let you die. You have what we call a pre-existing condition and we can't cover you. You won't be able to get insurance anywhere else either, but oh well, you've had a good 15 year life. Thanks for calling!"

But McCain did say he would "lower costs" a bunch of times. He doesn't say how those costs would get lower, mostly by magic, I guess. Costs will go down for the insurance industry at least since people won't be buying their product which they can't afford and businesses will no longer provide it (why would they - it's eating away too much of their profits and employees are getting tax credits now), so the insurance industry will save a ton without claims from all of these poor people. A lot of broke, sick and/or dead people - business as usual and of no concern to you conservatives, though.

McCain's plan is awful for most but adequate for few, just how you folks like it.

mosis, learn that socialized health care is bad. The only reason that Canada has hobbled along is becuase the US is here with innovation and expensive procedures they can't do. Unless you beleive Mr. Moore and say that Cuba can support when we socialize, realize that nothing is free.

Read my comments above all you doubting conservatives. Vote Mccain

I didn't say socialized health care is good and I haven't seen Mr. Moore's movie, either, but I did see that Fox News gave it high marks. I have no clue what he thinks should happen nor do I much care since he is in no position to make it happen.

Obviously it's not free and the concept of insurance is a good one. I realize I have to pay now when I'm young and healthy so that older or sick people can benefit. It's about spreading risk. It's why companies can get insurance cheaper than you can on your own. Someday when I am old and sick I might need the help, hopefully not of course, but I might.

I just want that little part explained to me, though. When my niece hits her lifetime maximum in a few years, what happens to her? Her parents own a pretty good-sized farm so they have some money, but another million dollars in medical bills will put them into bankruptcy quickly. I seriously don't understand what you think should happen to her. You don't know her and don't care, but everyone knows someone like that, but yet they don't seem to understand the consequences of their poor decisions.

TO: mosis
RE: Maybe....

"But McCain did say he would "lower costs" a bunch of times. He doesn't say how those costs would get lower, mostly by magic, I guess." -- mosis

....he's taking a page from Great Britain's approach?

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2008/02/01/keeping-health-costs-down/

Here's the—please pardon the expression—'killer' quote....

Apparently she received a letter from her doctor that said:

“I am afraid I am writing to inform you of some bad news.

“I have been instructed by hospital management to remove your name from my waiting list. The prime reason for this decision relates to the 18-week target for patient treatment which is now in enforcement.

“I currently have a significant number of patients in breach of this and the simple solution by management is to reduce my waiting lists by removing patients’ names.”

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[If laughter is the best medicine, shouldn't we be regulating it?]

TO: All
RE: Well!

That came out poorly.

Go check the link.....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[There is a chasm, of carbon and silicon, the software can't bridge. - Haiku Error Msg]

Oh no!!!! She couldn't get her liposuction!! Heavens no, tell me it's not true. She may have to go for a walk instead.

Everyone would have to know about the plans to comment accordingly, and I am doubtful that anyone has taken the time to read them.

Insurance through your work is priced better than it would be if you bought it on your own because there are a lot of people over which to spread the risk.

If the government was the corporation, and everyone "working" for this corporation was insured, now it's easy to spread out the risk and lower cost per individual. People still will have to pay premiums and still will choose their insurance provider, but now they have more options plus they are guaranteed to be covered.

I don't know if they'll have to wait for liposuction, though.

Oh no!!!! She couldn't get her liposuction!! Heavens no, tell me it's not true. She may have to go for a walk instead.

Everyone would have to know about the plans to comment accordingly, and I am doubtful that anyone has taken the time to read them.

Insurance through your work is priced better than it would be if you bought it on your own because there are a lot of people over which to spread the risk.

If the government was the corporation, and everyone "working" for this corporation was insured, now it's easy to spread out the risk and lower cost per individual. People still will have to pay premiums and still will choose their insurance provider, but now they have more options plus they are guaranteed to be covered.

I don't know if they'll have to wait for liposuction, though.

By the way, whoever programmed this comments section did a "heck of a job." Except for the fact that it doesn't work properly.

When people talk about socialized medicine is that like the VA ?

McCain was my fourth choice among Republicans. He's mushy on some key issues. He has conservative sentiments, but not conservative principles. But it is ludicrous to say he is the same as Obama or Clinton. The American Conservative Union rates members of Congress each year, using 25 selected key votes. On the 50 votes for 2005-2006 (2007 was not yet out) McCain differed from them about 30 times. That's not trivial.

Also, it's ridiculous to assert that McCain broke his oath to uphold the Constitution. I consider McCain-Feingold unconstitutional, but a majority of the House, a majority of the Senate, and the Supreme Court all disagree with me. McCain is wrong, but he doesn't know it - therefore not in violation of his oath.

Oh, and great job you're doing in Pueblo County, Mr. Pelto. Since 2002 the county has gone from evenly divided to 70% Democrat; the Republican vote for Governor and U.S. House is down 40%.

TO: mosis
RE: Look At It THIS Way....

"Oh no!!!! She couldn't get her liposuction!! Heavens no, tell me it's not true. She may have to go for a walk instead." -- mosis

You were concerned about your daughter's chances for getting proper medical care under some unspecified scheme that McCain was considering to reduce the high cost of medical care.

I suggested he might be taking a page from the Scotts were taking, vis-a-vis the article/link I provided.

So what if that instance was 'liposuction'. I suspect that if the list of patients continues to grow and the marvelous NHS of Great Britain continues to be unable to meet the demand, they'll start cutting other conditions.

Eventually, they could well get to the point that they agree with the scenario you conjectured for your daughter.

But if you want to ignore that....that's your perogative.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Camels....Noses....Tents. You know the rest.]

TO: Rich Rostrom
RE: Ridiculous?

“Also, it's ridiculous to assert that McCain broke his oath to uphold the Constitution.” -- Rich Rostrom

The only thing that is ‘ridiculous’ around here is some peoples’ grasp of the English language, Rich.

Or, please explain how a bill that would not allow publication of criticism of an incumbent member of Congress in the days ahead of an election does NOT strike at the First Amendment? And how sponsoring a bill that does such is not a violation of an oath to “uphold and defend the Constitution of the United State....and bear true faith and allegiance to the same”?

“I consider McCain-Feingold unconstitutional....” -- Rich Rostrom

So. You agree that it’s ‘unconstitutional’....hoooow niiiiice.

“.....but a majority of the House, a majority of the Senate, and the Supreme Court all disagree with me. McCain is wrong, but he doesn't know it - therefore not in violation of his oath.” -- Rich Rostrom

I guess you missed that item (above) to our friendly JAG officer from the [five-sided] Puzzle Palace. The reply to HIS use of the SAME bogus argument; ‘they all agreed, so it can’t be BAD’.

Ever hear of the Fugitive Slave Act? How about the Dred Scott Decision? Maybe your experience with the vaunted American public education system told you something about an event called the Civil War?

600,000 American lives lost over 4 years because....Hey! They all agreed....Black people are not REALLY human beings.

So, because they didn’t KNOW it was wrong, they weren’t ‘wrong’ and the lost lives are okay. Just an unfortunate accident of the government system.

You were talking about ‘ridiculous’?

I don’t think your argument that because McCain doesn’t know he’s wrong he can’t be held accountable.

Ever hear of the commonly held aspect of the Law that ‘ignorance’ is not an excuse? If not, next time you go before a judge, tell him, “Sir. I didn’t know I was wrong.”

Listen closely to what he says in reply. AND see what it gets you.

To put these two Acts, Fugitive Slave Act and McCain-Feingold, into a proper relationship, I suggest we take a quote from an author if the former’s period....

I think we must get rid of slavery or we must get rid of freedom. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

If you look at it from another perspective.....it could be rephrased to read....

I think we must defend freedom or do away with it.

Even if a little at a time.

As a corollary there is the famous axiom....

They can only take away the freedoms that you are unwilling to defend.

The question that comes to my mind is, “Why are so few people willing to defend the Bill of Rights against such attacks?”

This is immediately followed by the question of, “How could anyone expect someone who has already proven himself to be an enemy of the Bill of Rights to defend them?”

RE: Life In Pueblo County

“Oh, and great job you're doing in Pueblo County, Mr. Pelto. Since 2002 the county has gone from evenly divided to 70% Democrat; the Republican vote for Governor and U.S. House is down 40%.” -- Rich Rostrom

You are here?

You want to do something about it?

Great! Meet me at the Pueblo County Conference Center, 10th and Santa Fe today. Old Historic Northside Organization (OHNO) is holding it’s annual retreat on how to improve things around here. We can talk during a break in the action.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[BIll of Rights — Void where prohibited by Law.]

TO: Rich Rostrom
RE: Ooops....

....that last quotation should read....

They can only take away those freedoms that you are WILLING to give up.

My mistake. Hadn't had my morning coffee yet.

Sorry.

Chuck(le)
[Seeing my great fault. With eye-opening coffee. I write again. - Haiku Error Msg]

I'm surprised that you count Obama's lack of national experience against him. After all, George W. Bush only had 1.5 terms as governer of Texas, and that was his sole political experience. And to call out a woman for not leaving her husband, wrong though he may be, certainly wouldn't go over well in most churches.

Bush killed the GOP? The spineless congress who let the minority dems control them for two years had nothing to do with it? The GOP voters who stayed home to "teach everyone a lesson" had nothing to do with it?

Get real. How many of those massively bloated spending bills did Bush veto prior to '97? My memory isn't great, but I can't remember any.

It's easy to blame Bush - everyone does it - much harder to look at the thing broadly and realize that there were screwups down the line, starting with the fact that the super conservatives on the right who are still crying for Fred (who didn't want it) knew back in '04 that they would need a candidate in '08 and did nothing about it.

No, the superconservatives screwed the Republican party when they nominated Bush in 2000. McCain would have won the general Election and couldn't possibly have become less popular than Bush is. Certainly he wouldn't have spent money like a drunken liberal.

Here we are 8 years later, and McCain will likely get the nomination, but unless Clinton wins the Democratic nominee, he has no chance of winning.

And to be clear, if virtually any of the others (including all that have dropped out) got the nomination my 70 year old dad would have voted for Obama. For reference, my Dad has voted republican in every POTUS election since Ike. If it had been Clinton and someone else, I'm not sure he would have voted for either candidate

We're going to get Obama or Clinton. If that bugs you, blame the base. Let's face it, if someone were to run today that would do everything like Reagan, the base would call him a liberal.

About the only way I can possibly see McCain winning this time is if Hillary is the nominee.

She won't get as many of the young voters that love Obama and some in the center that like Obama may like McCain more, or feel he's less divisive.

I could personally live with any of the 3. None are perfect, but I've yet to see a perfect candidate. For now, I'll be happy with competent.

TO: casey
RE: Base[less] Accusations

"We're going to get Obama or Clinton. If that bugs you, blame the base. Let's face it, if someone were to run today that would do everything like Reagan, the base would call him a liberal." -- casey

Wrong.

I'm part of the 'base' and I blame the Party.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[For additional information, please re-read message(s) above.]

TO: Rich Rostrom
RE: [OT] Missed Ya

Sorry you didn't make it to the meeting yesterday....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. The distaff suggests that your data about 'conversion' of the County from 'balanced' to Democrat may be 'off'. She was born and raised here. She ran for the state assembly last iteration. We studied the data and we'd like to see the data you're pulling your numbers from.

Would you be so kind as to provide it?