The Internet home for American gay conservatives.
January 19, 2008 by GayPatriot
January 20, 2008 at 2:17 am - January 20, 2008
I’m right with you Bruce.
What were the fools in South Carolina thinking?
January 20, 2008 at 2:50 am - January 20, 2008
So THIS is where you live. Shoulda figured that.
WTF? Hopefully Thompson will win Super Tuesday.
Nice place you have here.
January 20, 2008 at 3:16 am - January 20, 2008
Huckabee and McCain are the two most Big Government, crypto-authoritarian, “compassionate” Republicans who would complete the destruction of the Republican Party as a force for individual liberty, and – not coincidentally – send the party back into its 1970s minority electoral status.
And yes, I know McCain is allegedly a fiscal conservative… all that the label means, in his case, as that as President he would let the Democrats talk him into raising taxes.
January 20, 2008 at 3:53 am - January 20, 2008
But he served in the military and was a POW.
Voting for McCain because he was a POW a quarter-century ago or Huckabee because he was a Baptist preacher is like buying a new car because you like the color. -Ann Coulter
January 20, 2008 at 7:05 am - January 20, 2008
Good grief!!!!!! I thought Chester County PA politics was bizarre. McCain is about as much like SC voters than I am. I do not know where people’s heads are. However I do have a great story for all of you. yesterday a friend called asking if her friend, a staunch R could vote for Obama. She hates H and wanted to make a statement. I explained that it was a R primary and the only people on the ballot would be R’s. Several hours later, she left me a message that the juge of election at her polling place told her these SC rules “you do not register by party in SC (which is not true), you can go to either primary and vote. First of all, that judge of elections should be recalled and secondly, I had to declare a party when I registered (although they do not put parties on voters reg cards here) and when I voted absentee, the voters services people asked me my party and I was directed to the R machine to vote. Whew!!!!!!!!!! A friend also went to our local polling place and she was the only one there and she got the distinct impression that she could have voted as many times as she wanted.
Boy, South Carolina needs alot of guidance.
January 20, 2008 at 7:35 am - January 20, 2008
For so long, McCain was hurt by the Anybody But McCain movement. Who really saved him? Huckabee. Right now, the strongest ABM movement is the Anybody But Mike movement. And for good reason. He can’t win with non-evangelicals. Heck, I am an evangelical Christian myself, and I can’t stomach him. I can’t stand how one day he uses all his big religious talk (like about changing the Constitution to reflect God’s law) to bolster his support with conservative Christians (that is, conservative Christians more conservative than myself, and I think I’m a pretty conservative Christian) and another day he’s wondering why he gets singled out with the religious questions. Put simply, he strengthens a stereotype about conservative Republicans that I disdain, that is, the stereotype that Christian conservatives want to force our religion on others. At the same time, his advocacy of big government and mushy foreign policy make me hate the idea of him being president even more. So, even though I’m not happy McCain won SC, I wouldn’t have preferred a Huck win.
Say what you will about McCain, I do think he is the most likely to beat whomever the Dems send up. I’ve known a lot of people over the years who dislike the GOP and wouldn’t vote for a Republican except they say they’d vote for McCain. I myself would much prefer Mitt or Rudy. (Or Fred, if by some miracle he could turn his campaign around.) Even so, I think McCain would be far, far better than Barack or Hillary, who are wrong about everything.
Justin Wong says
January 20, 2008 at 8:56 am - January 20, 2008
Oh come on now — quit your whining about McCain. I’m glad that he’s rising above the moderate image that the liberal media likes to paint him with in order to scare Republican voters away from him. They know that he’s the one who can beat the Democrats. McCain is a conservative — those of you who think he isn’t because he voted against the Bush tax cuts due to their lack of a corresponding decrease in government spending — that’s a very conservative reason not to vote for a tax cut. It seems some of McCain’s detractors just want to be conservative on the easy stuff — getting money back from the government — and not the hard stuff — reducing the size of government.
He has shown a capacity for tricking liberals into voting for conservative justices (Roberts and Alito). And his voting record is very pro-life, without the religious aura which can make fencesitters uneasy. Because he can appeal to independents, he can achieve real results for the unborn babies of America, and that matters more to me than whether or not he’s the anointed darling of the evangelical establishment.
On the issue of illegal immigration, there is not one (viable) candidate or Republican president, past or present, who has the kind of record we want, so I don’t think that advantage falls to anyone. At least McCain is honest about what he’s done and where he is on the issue — the other candidates are not as forthcoming about their own records, so while I like some of the things I hear from them, they’re just not credible to me.
Vince P says
January 20, 2008 at 10:17 am - January 20, 2008
McCain is a conservative — those of you who think he isn’t because he voted against the Bush tax cuts due to their lack of a corresponding decrease in government spending — that’s a very conservative reason not to vote for a tax cut
Sounds to me like McCain doesn’t understand the true benefit of a tax decrease… it increases reveunues! All they had to do was keep spending at zero growth (which of course they didn’t… and neither would have the Democrats lest anyone fall for that lie)
January 20, 2008 at 10:33 am - January 20, 2008
Vince says “All they had to do was keep spending at zero growth.”
Basically, you mean “all they had to do was keep big government at its present level of bigness.”
January 20, 2008 at 10:59 am - January 20, 2008
Vince says “All they had to do was keep spending at zero growth.”Basically, you mean “all they had to do was keep big government at its present level of bigness.”Comment by Justin Wong — January 20, 2008 @ 10:33 am – January 20, 2008
Comment by Justin Wong — January 20, 2008 @ 10:33 am – January 20, 2008
I was being realistic not idealistic.
January 20, 2008 at 12:09 pm - January 20, 2008
Justin Wong: Thank you for confirming the majority of what I said about McCain.
McCain is a conservative
Two words for you: McCain-Feingold. One of the most un-conservative, destructive attacks on the American tradition of free speech, ever passed.
Two more words for you: Immigration shamnesty.
those of you who think he isn’t because he voted against the Bush tax cuts due to their lack of a corresponding decrease in government spending — that’s a very conservative reason not to vote for a tax cut.
Translation: McCain supported higher taxes. Or, as I put it at #3, “as President he would let the Democrats talk him into raising taxes.”
He has shown a capacity for tricking liberals into voting for conservative justices (Roberts and Alito).
That is some spin! LOL!
his voting record is very pro-life
Translation: McCain wants to increase the federal government’s control of people in this area, too.
Because he can appeal to independents
I’m an Independent. I assure you, he doesn’t appeal to me. Also, keep checking his vote totals from Independents compared to 2000.
On the issue of illegal immigration, there is not one (viable) candidate or Republican president, past or present, who has the kind of record we want… At least McCain is honest…
Honestly insane, when it comes to illegal immigration. There, I said it. There is a difference between “lame” and “insane”. The record & instincts of Giuliani, Romney, and other tolerable candidates on immigration are merely lame.
he’s the one who can beat the Democrats
How? By conceding the Democrats’ key premises? (“shamnesty is good”, “more government is good”, etc.) It’s gonna take a more inspiring candidate than that, to beat either Hillary or Obama.
January 20, 2008 at 2:11 pm - January 20, 2008
Go ahead and rename me, “Dhimmi the Confessor” after this posting.
I tend to run very hot-cold with regards to McCain. There’s things that I like about him, i.e., his pro-life record, ect. Then again, there’s things I really don’t like about him – can we say the whole “amnesty” debacle?
So, I’m really up in the air about him. The better way to say is that ambivalent; that is to say, I’m torn between what I see as the two faces of Senator McCain. Then again, while I believe many independent centrist voters do not like brokering of an amnesty bill with Kennedy, I think by and large, many of those same voters tend to see him as a person who can reach across party lines to try and get things done. I’ll concede that he’s more than earned that mantle.
So, I dunno. I’d vote for him before I’d vote for Hillary or Obama, but it’d feel more like choosing the lesser of two evils than a statement of my personal belief in who can effectively govern our country.
I do find it quite interesting, however, that while he was pushing for amnesty, the state he represents has now put into place some of the most strident immigration policies and procedures around. That too resonates with me in regard to how in touch he currently is with his fellow Americans.
p.s., as an aside and completely unrelated, why do we refer to Hillary Clinton by her first name, but refer to Barack Obama by his last? Probably is the result of some push by her campaign to get us to feel more “familiar” and personal with her…hmmm…wait…now I’m talking conspiracies…sounding like a Paulista…HELP! LOL!!!
January 20, 2008 at 5:33 pm - January 20, 2008
p.s., as an aside and completely unrelated, why do we refer to Hillary Clinton by her first name, but refer to Barack Obama by his last?
That’s easy to answer. Go to each candidate’s site and see what they call themselves:
Gene in Pennsylvania says
January 20, 2008 at 7:36 pm - January 20, 2008
It’s just shorthand. Nuthing sinister. I refer to the Commander and Chief as W.