"Hillbama"? Now that name-calling is "infantile." "We live in a time where you canâ€™t afford a 'conscience'"? Wow, how sad you believe this.
It's funny, Rick. You thump your chest "I am hardly a 'party loyalist.' I am loyal to the United States of America..." I'm sure in your own mind dumping your Republican Party membership solidifies this. However, your arguments sound an awful lot like the stale old team sports politics many Americans, including myself, have grown tired of.
I particularly note your quote "...if you truly love this country and donâ€™t want to see Hilbama ruin it for decades to come." It reminds me of the tired 'liberals hate America' hyperventilation preached by the far-right (e.g., talk radio, Fox News, etc.) that has pretty much become a joke.
The right-wing demogogues I mentioned in my previous comment, despite holding a huge megaphone, have had no significant effect in the primaries. Personally, as an American, I view that as a positive turn. Hopefully, the Republican Party will be pulled from the clutches of extremists and returned to the mainstream.Comment Posted By S. Knabt On 10.02.2008 @ 15:08
Once upon a time I habitually voted Republican. Ironically, the rise of right-wing talk radio/Fox News cable demagogues like Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, Liddy, Ingraham, Savage, Gibson, et al turned me against the party. You can add Ann Coulter's nasty books to that list. While their heavily data-mined populist message led to a great surge in popularity of Republican conservatism, IMHO, they've stripped all reason from the party.
So now I generally, but by no means exclusively, vote Democratic. I'm forced to play the 'worst of 2 evils' game in the voting booth. I'd hazard to guess the vast majority of Americans are in the same boat. Obviously, Rick, you've been stuck in this rut with the rest of us.
All that said, characterizing people who can't stomach voting for any of the candidates as juvenile is wrong. Dr. Dobson says his position is "a matter of conscience." If he feels that strongly about it then respect it.
What's wrong with Chris Bowers stating he'll disassociate himself with the Democratic Party if the super delegates disenfranchise the popular primary/caucus vote? Why should a handful of party elite be able to overturn the results of rank-and-file party members and Democratic-leaning independents (like myself)? While the Republican Party doesn't have super delegates, isn't such a practice an example of the sort of political party corruption that led you to leave in disgust?
Personally, I'm enjoying the diminished role the above right-wing demagogues are having in nominating a Republican candidate. Listening to a frustrated Ann Coulter at CPAC screeching how the only way she won't vote for Hillery is if she's McCains VP pick is hilarious. Even funnier is her comparisons of McCain to Hilter (she reasons Hitler is the better because of his superior tax policies). Rush's bombast against McCain, while not as amusing, is actually more satisfying. His frustration is palpable as he realizes his influence is about nil. Ditto Sean Hannity's recent rants.
Unfortunately for me, I'm sure this setback is only temporary. Despite McCain's impressive lead in the race to the nomination, there's little enthusiasm for him. Republican primary/caucus turnout is significantly lower than Democratic turnout, for example. Whether he becomes prez or not, I'm sure the aforementioned demagogues will find plenty of material to rebuild their 'cred' over the next 4 years. Still, I can enjoy the moment.Comment Posted By S. Knabt On 10.02.2008 @ 11:07
Actually, Rick, you undermine your own argument by trash-mouthing Gore. Because, as we all know, he got more votes than George. The Electoral College did Gore in, not the majority of voters.Comment Posted By S. Knabt On 28.05.2007 @ 10:24
Pages (1) :