• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

McCain endorses Romney..the ciircle jerk is almost complete

I

iguanaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
74,293
Reaction score
32,536
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What is it about Republicans today that refuse to admit the inevitable? Romneycare here we come.:lol:

romney_evolution.jpg
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
What is it about Republicans today that refuse to admit the inevitable? Romneycare here we come.:lol:

romney_evolution.jpg
Click to expand...

Oh good another reason to not vote for Romney.
 
I was watching McCain's endorsement and couldn't help but thank my lucky stars that that angy little man didn't win.
 
McCain's endorsement is irrelevant and will probably cost Romney some voters.
 
iguanaman said:
What is it about Republicans today that refuse to admit the inevitable? Romneycare here we come.:lol:

romney_evolution.jpg
Click to expand...

A fool (liberal) and their brain will never be reunited.
 
Last edited:
McCain gives Romney his Kiss Of Death.

Stormfront gives Ron Paul their Kiss of Death.

lol. I think I'll just sit this next election out.
 
coolwalker said:
A fool (liberal) and their brain will never be reunited.
Click to expand...

Acknowledgement of the pathetic station of the Republican Party is not an automatic endorsement of the Democratic Party. I think we've been all around the block to know this by now.

Why defend that establishment?
 
But if not Romney and Paul, we're left with Santorum. That guy is the craziest of the lot. Paul may have some outrageous ideas on the fed and such, but he's looking to get less government. Romney....wait, what does he want to do? It seems to change all the time.
 
Ikari said:
But if not Romney and Paul, we're left with Santorum. That guy is the craziest of the lot. Paul may have some outrageous ideas on the fed and such, but he's looking to get less government. Romney....wait, what does he want to do? It seems to change all the time.
Click to expand...

Back in 2008 I said it wouldn't make a difference if McCain or Obama won. I was called a troll and said it was important to exercize your voting rights. I was like, "Whatevah, I do what I want."

 
Ikari said:
But if not Romney and Paul, we're left with Santorum. That guy is the craziest of the lot.
Click to expand...

Why do you say that? Just because he believes in and actually wants to govern by a set of Morals and Values? Gee.... that would be absolutely TERRIBLE, wouldn't it?
 
Tigger said:
Why do you say that? Just because he believes in and actually wants to govern by a set of Morals and Values? Gee.... that would be absolutely TERRIBLE, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

Yeah and he would like to probably impose those morals and values on those who don't want them, and associate religious law with civil law.

Bad stuff.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Yeah and he would like to probably impose those morals and values on those who don't want them, and associate religious law with civil law.

Bad stuff.
Click to expand...

Hey, you folks can always move to Canada of Europe. Definitely no morals or values associated with any of those governments and it would leave the United States to those of us who understand that this nation was founded on Principles rather than the lack therof that seems to be the standard these days.
 
Way past time for Mr. McCain to move aside, and pitch in to the Republican cause quietly behind the scenes...let's leave 2008 behind us, or President Obama will steamroll anyone remotely associated with McCain. No offense, just want to move forward and not press the rewind button in 2012 is all.
 
Tigger said:
Why do you say that? Just because he believes in and actually wants to govern by a set of Morals and Values? Gee.... that would be absolutely TERRIBLE, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

You mean like the Taliban? Santorum wants to establish the Christiban in America. You'd like that, I suppose. It would be very rigid and women would definitely be forced to the back of the bus.
 
Risky Thicket said:
You mean like the Taliban? Santorum wants to establish the Christiban in America. You'd like that, I suppose. It would be very rigid and women would definitely be forced to the back of the bus.
Click to expand...

I would prefer it to be based on Morality rather than Religion, but at this point I'll take what I can get, RT. Without Values and Principles as the foundation for our society we will quickly end up in the wastebasket of history, and we're already headed that way. If this doesn't get turned around quickly we'll be there before you know it.
 
Tigger said:
I would prefer it to be based on Morality rather than Religion, but at this point I'll take what I can get, RT. Without Values and Principles as the foundation for our society we will quickly end up in the wastebasket of history, and we're already headed that way. If this doesn't get turned around quickly we'll be there before you know it.
Click to expand...

Our society should not have its moralities decided for us at the national level. We're far too large for that. If it were up to the states, then we'd have a good debate as to what's appropriate. But at the national level, it will lead to inevitable corruption. You're just replacing evils from the left with evils from the right at that point.
 
fredmertz said:
Our society should not have its moralities decided for us at the national level. We're far too large for that. If it were up to the states, then we'd have a good debate as to what's appropriate. But at the national level, it will lead to inevitable corruption. You're just replacing evils from the left with evils from the right at that point.
Click to expand...

I would suggest that the National Level is really the only practical place TO have our Morality determined at this point. For it to return to the State level you would have to return to a pre-1860 governmental structure where the STATE Governments were more important than the Federal Government, and I don't think either of us see that as a reasonable possibility at this point.

The supposed "evils" of the Right are much more to my liking than the "evils" of the Left are.
 
Tigger said:
Hey, you folks can always move to Canada of Europe. Definitely no morals or values associated with any of those governments and it would leave the United States to those of us who understand that this nation was founded on Principles rather than the lack therof that seems to be the standard these days.
Click to expand...

Canada lacks principles?

I think we have pretty good ones actually.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Canada lacks principles? I think we have pretty good ones actually.
Click to expand...

My apologies. I hadn't realized "Klingon Space" was part of Canada. I figured it was probably part of California.

To answer your question.... YES, Canada does lack principles. Other than Hockey I'm not sure there's ever been anything decent to come out of Canada.
 
Tigger said:
I would suggest that the National Level is really the only practical place TO have our Morality determined at this point. For it to return to the State level you would have to return to a pre-1860 governmental structure where the STATE Governments were more important than the Federal Government, and I don't think either of us see that as a reasonable possibility at this point.

The supposed "evils" of the Right are much more to my liking than the "evils" of the Left are.
Click to expand...

An evil is an evil and I will not vote for it, even if it is a lesser of evils. And I believe that my state government, where I have the most say, ought to have more control over my every-day decisions than the national government. That power in the hands of the national government, we would never be able to overthrow nor escape. It will lead to inevitable tyranny.

For example: Despite all of the great arguments against burning the flag as a form of protest, making this illegal based on very strong and reasonable moral grounds that the national level is in essence restricting what we think.

Why? Because most people are still ok with the Boy Scouts burning the flag in proper ceremony - I've done it in my childhood even. So the difference isn't in the act of burning the flag. But the thoughts going through the person's head at the time of the burning. Though I am personally against anyone burning the flag of my country, I do not believe we can ever make it illegal.

When we go beyond what is expressly stated in the constitution, we are asking for trouble.
 
fred, you need to realize that I'm an Ultra-Conservative and an Authoritarian. Libertarianism is pretty much the antithesis of what I believe in. So far as I'm concerned the American public has proven beyond any reasonable doubt that they do not have the intelligence, common sense, or principles to be able to govern themselves.
 
Tigger said:
fred, you need to realize that I'm an Ultra-Conservative and an Authoritarian. Libertarianism is pretty much the antithesis of what I believe in. So far as I'm concerned the American public has proven beyond any reasonable doubt that they do not have the intelligence, common sense, or principles to be able to govern themselves.
Click to expand...

I understand what your beliefs are... just not how you reached them. I'm only continuing the conversation to increase my own understanding, if you're willing.

Do you believe that this much power (to have the ability to legalize morality in such detail as you and Santorum suggest) can exist at the national level without someday, near or far, becoming supremely corrupt?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom