From Joseph Farah's commentary
For president: None of the above
Posted: May 01, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
© 2008It's probably no secret to anyone who reads my column regularly that I will not be voting for either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton for president.
But I will also not be voting for John McCain.
I could tell you all the reasons, and have already expressed them myself in a number of columns in recent months. But, this time, I'll let someone with whom I seldom agree express them for me.
His name is Jonathan Chait, senior editor of the New Republic. Here's what he wrote in that magazine:
"Even though it is in the public record, McCain's voting behavior during Bush's first term is almost never mentioned in the press anymore. Yet McCain's secret history is simply astonishing. It is no exaggeration to say that, during this crucial period, McCain was the most effective advocate of the Democratic agenda in Washington.
"In health care, McCain co-sponsored, with John Edwards and Ted Kennedy, a patients' bill of rights. He joined Chuck Schumer to sponsor one bill allowing the re-importation of prescription drugs and another permitting wider sale of generic alternatives. All these measures were fiercely contested by the health care industry and, consequently, by Bush and the GOP leadership. On the environment, he sponsored with John Kerry a bill raising automobile fuel-efficiency standards and another bill with Joe Lieberman imposing a cap-and-trade regime on carbon emissions. He was also one of six Republicans to vote against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. …
(Column continues below)
"McCain voted against the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts. He co-sponsored bills to close the gun-show loophole, expand AmeriCorps, and federal airport security. All these things set him against nearly the entire Republican Party."
It is no wonder McCain actively courted the idea of switching parties before his run for the presidency. He clearly belongs in the Democratic Party – even in these times when there is so little distinction between the two major parties.
No matter who becomes president this year, the White House will become a bully pulpit for the religion of global warming.
No matter who becomes president this year, the White House will support federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
No matter who becomes president this year, the White House will be in the corner of those who want more government regulation of campaign finance, meaning more restrictions on fundamental First Amendment rights.
No matter who becomes president this year, the White House will be firmly in the corner of wildly out-of-control illegal immigration, firmly opposed to building the barriers needed to suppress it and in favor of some form of amnesty for tens of millions of illegal aliens already here.
No matter who becomes president this year, the White House will oppose tax cuts, as McCain did in 2001 and 2003.
No matter who becomes president this year, the White House will name judges and justices more in the mold of American Civil Liberties Union political director Ruth Bader Ginsburg (whom McCain supported) than President Bush's judicial nominees defeated by the Gang of 14 (organized by McCain).
In other words, there is simply no reason for me to support McCain – no matter who his vice presidential nominee might be.
John McCain may indeed win the presidency. But it won't be because he is in tune with the will of the American people. It will be because they don't really know John McCain's record and because the Democratic Party will be split over the schism created between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
But John McCain won't get any help from me. He won't get my vote. In fact, to be honest, if the Republican Party is ever going to recover itself and become the party it was under Ronald Reagan, it will happen faster if John McCain is beaten. It will happen faster if Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton gets elected and implement the Big Brother, socialist agenda they both endorse.
Bring it on. I'll do my best to expose it. Maybe the American people will wake up and rediscover the meaning of freedom after tasting elitist, top-down, command-and-control, centralized socialism.
We're all going to experience it in the next four years. It's simply a question of who is going to be force-feeding it to us. I'd rather it come from the Democrats, so the American people know whom to blame.
Monday, May 5, 2008
O.K. I wanted to get some chatter going on the e-mail sent out by Harq. If you haven't already read it, I have posted it below.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The whole country is moving to the socialist left and we are lapping it up. Due to partisan politics being the way they are, even though, as stated in the e-mail, McCain is truly a democrat, the democrats will just say "See, I told you so. McCain sucks." HE IS NOT ON OUR SIDE!!! He does not state our views. I do not know how he got to where he is, but I am really dissapointed that he is supposed to be my voice. I am supposed to vote for him because he is less bad than Hillary or Barrack. I am sadly dissappointed and do not think he will be getting my vote either.
Ugh, it's a bad situation. The choices are these: choose the candidate that eases us down the slippery slope, and hope we don't slide too far, or sit back and let the socialists win, and pin our hopes on the fact that this would be a wake up call for the nation. Not an easy choice.
McBains only saving grace is that he supports the war on terror, other than that he's a lib.
My fear is that if we allow Hillary or Barrack to get in that there is no way that the damage will be undone. Much like once Roosevelt insitututed all the "New Deal" programs that 70 years later they still exist and we've been going down hill ever since. McBain offers a gentle stroll down a slight incline instead of a jump off a 900 foot cliff. You can recover from a slight incline.
The only other option is to get a congressional majority to conteract dingus or dingus and shoot for a decent conservative in the next presidental election. But predictions are stating that the Republicans are going to lose seats in congress not gain them.
I think Keiths viewpoint is flawed. It well known that freedom is lost little by little not usually in leaps and bounds. I think to say easing down the slipper slope is exactly what is so dangerous. From year to year people forget what it was like the year before. This is why freedom is lost little by little. Maybe what we need is a socialist - communist to wake the people up to what it is like to live without freedom.
I agree that we may need communism to wake everyone up. Unfortunately, China is a communist society, why haven't they woken up? Unless you are stating that the communism that Barrack wants to bring will be so swift that people will be shocked, and realize that is not what they want. Kind of like a cold glass of water in the face. Unfortunately, the way government works, nothing moves that quickly. They will just continue to raise babies in the air, tell us they are doing it for the good of the children, and we will all continue to lap up their crap.
Post a Comment