Like it or not it is McCain
 

Romney just quit and I love his statement. Take that O'basement and Jillary a loverly stick in the eye.
Ed

Yeah too bad.
Thanks alot Perot, err I mean Huckabee. :(

Once again....we gotta pick the lesser of 3 evils......sad it has come to this! Bad as it hurts, I have to back him!
Dan
:rolleyes:

Thanks alot Huckabee? What does that mean? A Governor that got over 60% and maybe was closer to 80% of his popular vote says something. Romney got about 40% of his state.

The people that know you best are the best references you can have, Bud, and a very popular governor says how well you do for those you work for.

Romney was for gun control, abortion, gay marriage and you say thanks a lot Huckabee.... shows me what a liberal you are to start with, or how little you do your homework. Either way, I'm thankful you're not making decisions for me.

Gotta agree Ed, got it, Waidmannsheil, Dom.

Hahahahaha, yep I'm a liberal. You've got me pegged.

Just may have to vote for Hillary this time around. WooHoo, PBR converted me. Maybe I can really do the vegetarian thing again too. That'll help me fit right in. :rolleyes:

Thanks for helping me to come out.

Yeah Skinny, you closet liberal. :D

As for Huckabee, I really wish he could have gotten a toehold. People, conservatives, touted Romney as the conservative of the group, but was he?

Other than matters with taxes as governor, Huckabee had more conservative views than Romney, unless Im missing something? And as for the taxes, Arkansas has been just above Mississippi in sucking hind teat for years and years in many sectors, until Mike came along. Im not too sure they didnt need to do something. I think their taxes were from the stone ages. So that could have been out of context.

On social matters, I know Huckabee was stonger. I really wish money wasnt such a factor. If more had known him, this may have been a whole new ballgame. He was more of a regional candidate because of his lack of funds.

As for the original topic, I guess Ill hold my nose and pull the lever for McCain. I hope there arent too many "suicide voters" out there that do something stupid like vote none of the above, independent or even liberal, in protest. That will commit suicide for the entire country.

On the other hand, if its Clinton, she has enough enemies and McCain is middle of the road enough, that he may be able to beat her. If its Obama, I know there are a ton of people, including hispanics, that will go for McCain over him.

As much as I hate it, a liberal leaning republican may be the only way out of this mess at the moment. :rolleyes:

After what the house just did over the economic stimulus package, a liberal Republican might be what we need for things to get done. If we had more conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans in Congress, then maybe something might just get done.

Pelosi fired off at the Senate Democrats about the Economic Stimulus package, and the thing got passed right away with the really controversial items being dropped (e.g., coal mining companies being able to take losses pretty far back against taxes paid, extending unemployment benefits an additional 13 weeks). The Senate agreed on the House bill, with the addition of the elderly (i.e., those receiving social security) and disabled vets also receiving the tax rebate, and the rebate amount wasn't cut at all for any of us. I applaud Pelosi and the entire House on getting this thing done and not arguing over extreme right or extreme left positions, but instead doing what needs to be done for the majority of Americans RIGHT now. Pelosi told the Senate to pass the bill, and then they could debate about the additional items that would be left off. Exactly what I was thinking. Pass what you know is good for the country and everybody can agree on. Don't tie special little interest groups to bills that are wide reaching and that should be passed right now.

Now, if they could only do something like this for the budget deficit and illegal immigration, things might be getting better in this nation.

Then what is needed
 

Is a line item veto law. Why do the legislators always add crap to a bill? Sheesh. It really should not be allowed

IMO....at least, McCain is primarily pro 2d....
we all understand the dem goal......just look at Cal/Chicago and
NY. Ill is not making any secret of it!!!!
Also, a splinter protest is gonna put a total disaster in office!!!!
There are more things on the table than just gun rights.....forgive
that comment.....
Dan

Ok great.... hahaha... you're not a liberal..... hahahaha..... ggoood one .... hahahaha... then you just don't do your homework....

"There are more things on the table than just gun rights.....forgive
that comment..... "

Not sure I can. If we no longer have gun rights, then we will have no rights at all other than the right to be either slaves or serfs. An McCaain ain't really all that Pro-gun and I have letter from him that back that up. After all, he is one of my Senators. :mad: He's for a permanent AWB for one thing which not only violates the 2nd, but the Militia Act of 1792, and Title 10 of the U.S. Code.
I've posted the following before, but I'll post it here again as a refresher.
Paul B.

"OK, lets discuss the 2nd Amendment. Good idea. It is my carefully considered opinion that the KEY WORD is MILITIA.

1. The Militia Act of 1792. One year after the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, Congress passed a law defining the militia. The Militia Act of 1792 declared that all free male citizens between the ages of 18 and 44 were to be members of the militia. Furthermore, every citizen was to be armed. The act stated:
"Every citizen...[shall] provide himself with a good musket, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints...."

The Militia Act of 1792 made no provision for any type of select militia such as the National Guard.

U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982) "In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined 'militia of the United States' to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated BY LAW (emphasis mine) to possess a [military style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipmemnt....There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a 'militia,' they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the national Guard."

Current Federal Law: 10 U.S.C. Sec. 311. "The militia of the Untied States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and...under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States.....

Supreme Court: U.S. v. Miller 1939 In this case, the Court stated that, "The Militia comprised of all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense...[and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves AND OF THE KIND IN COMMON USE AT THE TIME. (emphasis mine)
(BTW, Miller lost in court because he did not show up. It was never taken into account that his no show was because he had passed away.)

More on Title 10 of the U.S. Code

UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 302, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are -

(1) the organized militia which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and

(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or of the Naval Militia.

Now it took me all of about ten minutes to find all that information. Just go to the Gun Owners of America's website and look for their firearms fact sheet. There's 24 pages of good information there."

Homework? Still stuck on that are ya? :)
If the guy is God's gift to the GOP, then why aren't the masses lining up?
Sure, just read his platform which makes him out to be the "true" conservative: http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.Home
He is too perfect. When something seems to good to be true...
A gut feeling gives me the willys and don't care for him.
Now if he ends up as president we'll see if he stands by his convictions. If he does that, I'll be the first to say I underestimated him.

Huckabee
 

To me Huckabee was the best choice by far. As governor he has stood up for the sportsman time and time again, but he does not have national recognition or the slick ways of af Arkansas' other governor turned president Slick Willy. For any dyed in the wool liberals out there mrs Slick Willy may be available. God help us if she wins.

I like the Idea of a third party candidate.

If Brad Pitt was to run as an independent I don't think McCain or Clinton would be able to beat him. Thanks to the Enews channel and TMC, plus the People mags and such. Most people would feel they know him and relate to him more than any of the other front runners. Look at what the movies did for Conan the barbarian in CALIFORINIA.

Most people don't really know what issues any of the candidates stand for on any issue other than the war and right to life/gun rights anyway. (Except you fine posters on this board. of course)

I can't tell much difference in a conservative democrat or a liberal republican. GOP to me stands for GAS, OIL, and Power. Democrats spend to much money. My money.

When the republicans are in office i seem to build prisons, when the democrats are in office i seem to build schools. Other than that i don't see much of a difference. I still get paid every week.

How much liberal politics or conservative politics can one take before getting fed up with the whole ball of wax.

I do like the fact the more young voters are actually going to the polls. Those younger voters might just be the key to either side winning this election. Teach your children well.