Party time for Paliniacs
My fellow Paliniacs, Governor Palin is on a flight all the way to Ohio, Mitt Romney is out of the running, Pawlently is out of the running, the girl, the one that I have been making the case for almost 2 weeks, now I believe she is officially gonna be the VP candidate!
http://makingthecaseforpalin.blogspot.com/
My blog is now the blog, making the case for McCain & Palin!
Yahooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.blogsforjohnmccain.com/trackback/2273
»
- makingthecaseforpalin's blog
- Login or register to post comments
THANK YOU GOD
I'm so happy right now.
For some unknown reason, more democrats are on my blog...very disturbing.
ROCK THE VOTE.
MCCAIN
PALIN
08
God does not vote in US
God does not vote in US elections.
Tsk, Tsk "mccainisold"
Once again you have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that liberal democrats have no substance, no fresh ideas....only tired old plattitudes and bad language.
oi.
McCain has picked a VP who is strong on oil, young, a mother of 5, she is great on many issues, pro life.
And someone who women can support.
MCCAIN
PALIN
and if she weren't pro-life
and if she weren't pro-life ? I supose she'd then, to you, be none of those things, right ? Sheesh.
Congratulations, makingthecasefo..
I know you have hoped for Sarah Palin to be chosen for a long time, while I was hoping for Huckabee. I don't know much about Sarah; however, I have read a number of articles about her today and impressed with her diverse resume and accomplishments. I watched her acceptance speech and thought she sounded articulate and well grounded. If the Dems attack her "inexperience" it will be lost in Obama's inexperience. If they attack the fact that she has 5 children including a Down syndrone baby, the feminists will scream, "discrimination." Apparently, she has fought against big oil and corruption in Alaska, so that is anti-establishment. I do not see a clear line of attack against her.
I will admit I am still trying to learn about Sarah and am reeling from the sting of Huckabee's throw under the bus, but I like what I see thus far. I am happy for you and all of those who have supported Palin. She looks like a strong, vibrant selection!
Good woman but underwhelming choice
Most Americans have never even heard of Sarah Palin! While it's awesome to see such a bright star in the GOP getting recognition so soon, I'm afraid that McCain has now lost a really good point that Hillary supporters used against Obama -- his lack of experience.
Plus, I can't help but cringe when I think about how he's going to look so old next to her and how young she's going to look next to him. Oh well, we'll see how it goes ...
Absolutely so, Woody. READ
Absolutely so, Woody. READ MAH NEW BLOG, MATE !
Better the VP
The point has already been made by a Republican strategist on TV that Palin already has more experience as the chief executive of an executive branch of government than the Democrats front runner, Obama. Much better to have the "inexperience" label levied against the VP than the Pres. She has already accomplished more in the year and a half she has been governor of Alaska than most of her predecessors did, in their full terms. She is feisty....she'll tear Biden apart with his "Washington insider" mentality.
That is a good point, but
That is a good point, but that your handle is "preacerdude" is exactly what bothers me about this VP pick. John McCain is running for PRESIDENT, not POPE / PASTOR / RABBI. If the Republican party becomes the party of religion in politics, then we're headed back toward the 1600's when people thought it necessary to attack, even torture, burn, and mutilate each other trying to force their theology down people's throats. No thanks, mate. John McCain has caved -- shown weakness -- by picking an inexperienced unknown for his running mate rather than Joe Lieberman, Tom Ridge, Rudy Giuliani, even Mitt Romney.
Double standard
So in other words, just because I am a preacher, I can't have a political opinion....yet the liberal preachers such as Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, and even Rev. Martin Luther King can all express their political positions but not me and Mike Huckabee?
But that is not what really bothers you is it? All your verbosity about inquisition theology is merely a cover up for the fact that you don't believe I have a right to an opinion because I believe in the "sanctity of life"....as did Thomas Jefferson when he penned the words to the Declaration of Independence...."that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights....". The question then becomes when do those rights begin? Those of us who believe in the sanctity of life, believe those rights begin at conception whereas those in favor of abortion believe that those rights begin at birth.
You and the other abortionists then have to fabricate a "double standard" belief system whereby a "baby" is not a "baby" but a "fetus" until it is born. How ludicrous that is! Any half-way intelligent human being will tell you when he or she views a sonogram that there is a baby in there. The abortionist argument makes no sense when faced with the irrefutable fact that "murder" is "murder" whether it occurs 5 minutes after the baby is born or 9 months before the baby is born....he or she is still a baby and to take his or her life is still murder.
The last statistics I saw were that 97.8% of all abortions were because of birth control. 60% of those were at the insistence and pressure from a male figure (normally, father, boyfriend,or husband) which greatly undermines the argument for "women's rights". Less than 1% of abortions were performed because the life of the mother was in danger and a little over 1% were due to incest and rape. Yet, as I have heard you advocate as most abortionists do, that the reason you are for abortion is to protect the life of the mother. I guess you feel that it is O.K. to kill millions of babies that were murdered because of birth control in order to insure the safety of less than one percent of pregnant women.
I am a former pastor....now an evangelist. While a pastor, I noticed that a very high percentage of women who came to me for pastoral counselling and who had tried to commit or were seriously contemplating suicide had previously had an abortion. I came to the conclusion that "murder" is "murder" whether it be "murder of the unborn" or "murder of oneself" and once "murder" has been used as a solution to solve one delemma, then it becomes an option when other devastating situations occur. I also discovered that taking the life of a defenseless, helpless unborn child gnaws away at a woman...and something deep down inside screams out that "this is wrong".
In a previous blog, you inferred that it was not the responsibility of government to dictate moral behavior. Yet, I ask the question...then what is the purpose of government? Is it not the function of government to establish laws preventing murder and thievery? Surely no one in his or her right mind would argue that those forms of behavior can be tolerated by society ...yet to refrain from such behavior is to be governed by a set of moral principles that says..." I will not do that".
Lastly, only because you brought it up, the handle,"preacherdude" is a trail name that was given to me when I ministered to and fed hikers along the Appalachian Trail. I also preach as an evangelist all over the country and am presently waiting upon the Lord to provide the funds for me to answer the many invitations that I have received from India, Pakistan, and other parts of the world. I would be delighted to "private message" you my website if you would like to learn more about the ministry to which the Lord has called me.
You can believe all you wan.
You can believe all you wan. Just keep your BELIEFS out of the political sphere, please. I will NOT have GOVERNMENT preaching my private / family moral decisions to me, DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME SIR ?
And what makes you think I am any less opposed to liberal preachers putting their religion into politics ? Though I do note that usually the liberal pastors who you cite talk about civil rights issues: and civil rights issues are most certainly political ones.
I'm inclined to think that the whole "social coservative" thing is about how Segregationists, having finally, 100 years after the Civil War, been defeated utterly on racial segregation, have moved to the "social" issues in order to impose their segregationist, fundamentalist view of the world on the rest of us yet again if they can. Sorry, Suh, it will not work. The Confederacy was born in rottennness and it is GONE.
"sanctity of life" is about "human" ie 'civil rights"
Since you can't refute the factural arguments that I presented on the inhumanity of abortion, you have resorted to "name calling" and a ludicrous attempt to equate "sanctity of life" arguments with segregation and slavery....that's called "bait and switch"... and intellectual liberals always resort to that tactic when they are at a loss or are incapable of debating the facts of an issue.
So if you do not choose to rebuttle my arguments or are as I suspect, incapable of refuting them without resorting to these afore mentioned tactics....then please do us all a favor and SHUT UP!!!! It is a complete waste of my time and the time of others on this blog to be subjected to your verbal abuse when you refuse to support your arguments with facts rather than with inuendos.
Abortion is wrong. That is
Abortion is wrong. That is my belief. But one can NOT use government to oppose it because millions of otherwise good people feel differently. It is a personal decision, as personal as any decisions that free people make. (I speak from personal, family experience here, with my own daughter, and from experience as an attoney in Family Court.) Including people of faith. The pro-life movement, of which I was once a part, must use education and persuasion if its wishes to curb abortion. But when pro-life moves into the governmental sphere it overreaches AND loses it effectiveness. AS recent history has shown.
Law of the Land
The rule of Law once was that abortion is wrong and that unborn humans have the same rights as those of us who made the journey down the natal canal. That law was changed....not by legislative decree by elected representatives, but by a nine person judiciary who decided to "legislate" rather than interpret the constitution. As long as "Roe vs. Wade" is the precedental "law of the land" no legislation either state or congressional can penetrate that barrier. Since the issue has been so alligned with "women's rights" the only course of action for us who believe that abortion violates the rights of an unborn child is a constitutional amendment or to have "Roe vs. Wade" overturned.
It makes all the difference in the world on how one views abortion....if one believes, as I do, that abortion is "murder of an unborn child" then it becomes a matter of legislative permissability ....because there are innumerable laws against the act of murder....and murder has been unacceptable in every civilization since the dawn of time.
So, once again it comes back to the question of when does "human rights" begin? Birth or conception? Government has the right to protect the rights of a human being after birth ...that is universally accepted. My point is that government has the right to protect the rights of the "unborn child" because that is where life actually begins.
I certainly agree with you that educating women to choose other options is adviseable. I also know the pressures that are exerted on teenage girls to have abortions rather than to choose to carry the baby "full term" and then to put the child up for adoption. Pressures come from fathers, boyfriends and husbands...as well as from organizations such as "planned parenthood" who are sometimes involved in "selling abortions" rather than in providing choices for the young girls. A few years back, I heard an address by the president of NOW who was upset that the number of abortions performed in the U.S. was substantially lower(because of pro-life education efforts) as the year before. She stated that soon "roe vs. Wade" would be of no use if those rights were not going to be used.
So I am convinced that we must conduct a 3-pronged attack against the evils of abortion...(1) education
(2) Striving to overturn "roe vs. wade"
(3) advocating a "sanctity of life" constituional amendment.
In order to accomplish (2) and (3) it is imperative that we elect officials who believe that "human rights" begin with conception.
Absolutely right!
I'm kind of new to this blog, and I can't tell you how glad I am to see a VERY like-minded person here. It makes me feel better about the future of the Republican Party, and I truly believe that the party's future and America's future are threatened if the views of ... certain others ... become our party's platform.
Anybody who knows about the last few decades of Christian political action knows that it's been a heartbreaking time for us. My dad voted for Jimmy Carter in the hopes that he would bring his Christian values into the White House and spread them through the nation. Now Jimmy Carter is a punchline -- AT BEST.
We religious conservatives have almost given up on what was once a driving issue -- not allowing the federal government to shut God out of our public schools. We've been struggling to overturn the unimaginable decadence of Roe vs. Wade, and while we've seen many leaders step into office promising to do just that, it still stands, doesn't it?
Now we have liberals who will not rest until gay marriage is the law of the land, and I see very little effort to keep this from happening. Scattershot ballot initiatives in scattered state elections. Senator McCain will SAY he opposes gay marriage, and I'm comforted by that, but it's all sizzle and very little steak until he actually proposes doing something about that. I'm worried that the man who has been criticized for much of his career as a RINO will show his true colors once elected, and sit on his hands while the liberal effort to pervert the institution of marriage goes unchecked. Somebody tell me that's not a valid concern -- I dare you!
What I see in our party is a lot of going along to get along, and an alarming amount of the notion that our laws don't, or should not, come from a divine source. Well, bash me all you want, but I believe, as deep down in my heart as you could possibly imagine, that if we choose to steer our country away from God, we face a dark, dark future.
We Christian voters are the ones who brought this country President George W. Bush, and while he is not a perfect man, he has pointed our country in the right direction on many crucial issues. It seems like just because liberals have latched onto the notion that President Bush is some sort of whipping boy for everything that's gone wrong in our country, we've decided to abandon almost EVERYTHING he stands for. As though the changes we must make in our country can come without tension, without struggle, without a fight!
Sorry this is so long-winded. What I'm trying to say is that I see the leaders of our party making dangerous gestures toward validating some of the most wrong-headed beliefs of liberalism, and that while I will be casting a Republican vote in November, I will also be keeping a wary eye on the party's leaders. I, for one, will not sell my soul to win elections.
I hope you're right
You know how the masses can be, when the dems starting feeding their "12 years vs. 20 months" mantra to their close friends in the media, I just worry that that's what voters are going to focus on. If Senator McCain was going to go for somebody with the values of Governor Palin, I wish he'd have picked Mike Huckabee instead. Nobody questions Huckabee's experience, he'd get a lot of us out to the polls, and he'd be more of a clear signal that the GOP hasn't abandoned President Bush and the Conservative Christian movement, as the media likes to make it out.
I tell you, this just takes me back to when Senator McCain won the nomination for all intents and purposes. We have blasted this man privately and not-so-privately for years. Now he's our leader, and I'm not going to pretend that doesn't make me a little nervous.
It just makes me feel like the party leaders are leaning dangerously close to sending Americans the wrong message about what we believe in. We've finally got Senator McCain's head straight about protecting the unborn, utilizing our own energy resources, using the necessary tactics to defend our nation against terrorists, etc., but I just think that we better win this election and then watch this adminstration like hawks so that they don't start selling out our values. Then, I'd love to see a future Republican leadership that includes both Governors Palin and Huckabee at the top!
Huck was my first choice also
However, as much as I wanted to see Huck on the ticket, I continue to marvel at the political "coup d'etat" that McCain has come up with. Palin represents backgrounds that have traditionally voted Democratic....women, union membership. Yet she also embodies the traditionally Republican characteristics of less government, fighting corruption in government, cutting spending, and sanctity of life as well as other issues that are dear to us.
I too hope that four years from now we will be working for a Huckabee/Palin ticket....and I agree that once McCain and Palin are elected we should watch them. Speaking at Rick Warren's church, John McCain stated that he believed that "human rights" began at conception and that his would be a "pro-life" administration. It will be interesting to see if he appoints supreme court justices who openly advocate the overthrow of "Roe vs. Wade". Only time will tell.
In the meantime ...we have an election to win and I believe the candidates we have put forth are fully cable of garnering 270 electoral votes.
You blasted him, you say. So
You blasted him, you say. So why are you interested ? Why not go and support some Neo-Segregatonist -- a new Strom Thurmond, I'm sure there are many, or a Bible-thumping racist like William Jennings Bryan -- running on a new Dixiecrat ticket ? (Or should I say a Creationist ticket?) John McCain is NOT a Dixiecrat.
You ought to go watch INHERIT THE WIND again.
Tone it down
Mass Mouth,
I think it's time you tone it down on bashing religious conservatives. Their point of view is welcome on Blogs for John McCain and they are a vitally important part of the GOP base. It is one thing to disagree on policy, but it's time for you to end the kind of mean-spirited attitude displayed in your comment above. If you continue doing so, your comments will be deleted.