See other Editorial Articles
Title: Are Non Voters and Non McCain Voters Responsible if Obama is Elected?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Nov 3, 2008
Author: A K A Stone
Post Date: 2008-11-03 10:44:40 by Old Friend
Keywords: None
Views: 686
Comments: 89
It is a simple question. Some people advocate not voting or voting third party. If you do that and Obama is elected and turns out to be a terrible dictator far worse then Bush. Are those people responsible for sitting on their hands and not voting? To a much lesser degree what about the thrid party voters. Would they have "wasted" their vote and come to regret it. Can we blame them for not voting McCain and at least trying to stop Obama. I suspect that if Obama is elected and these people who didn't vote may have some regret at some time in the future. Still undecided here. I guess I'll have to decide tomorrow.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Old Friend (#0)
No. Obama voters alone are responsible if he is elected. Most third party voters would not vote for either McCain or Obama so their votes for third party candidates do not help or hurt either of the MSM candidates.
God is always good!
Wow! I find it amazing that so many people are still undecided that are planning on voting. I knew who I was voting for since July 13th, Chuck Baldwin. His speech at the DC march rally on the Capitol lawn convinced me to vote for him. Ron Paul's endorsement was just icing on the cake. Voting for anyone other than who you really want to be President is IMO, a wasted vote. Someday maybe Americans will realize this, however I am not going to hold my breath waiting for that day.
God is always good!
The Democrats and Republicans are arrogant bastards. They act as though they own and are somehow entitled to people's votes, and that any votes that go to third party candidates are somehow "stolen" from them. I understand why they do it though. By calling third party candidates "spoilers" and blaming non-voting on apathy, they don't have to own up to the fact that they run shitty candidates like McCain and Obama. If people don't want to vote for Obama or McCain, chances are, it's Obama and McCain's fault, not the fault of "spoilers." I for one wouldn't have voted at all in the past 4 elections if it weren't for 3d party options.
On the other hand: Can we blame them for not voting Obama and at least trying to stop McCain. I suspect that if McCain is elected and these people who didn't vote may have some regret at some time in the future. But as I decline to participate in the lesser of the two evils approach to American presidential elections (a mere quarterback controversy every four years), I voted for Ron Paul and shall have a crystal clear conscious for the next four years.
AIPAC/PNAC/ADL/NAACP/FEDERAL RESERVE/SPLC/JINSA/ACLU/CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS/AEI/FEDERAL MEDIA & HOLLYWOOD: Oh, those Islamofascists.
This election is 2000 all over again, with the same rhetoric from both sides about "spoilers," "lesser evils," and all that crap. I remember hearing people make all kind of excuses for Bush because of hysteria about Gore. However bad Gore would have been (Clinton's third term), he couldn't possibly have been any worse than the Bush administration. "A vote for Buchanan is a vote for Gore" didn't con me into voting for Bush then, and "a vote for Bob Barr is a vote for Obama" won't con me into supporting McCain, who we all know will be Bush's third term. The point is, neither party owns my vote, and I'm not going to give the Dem-GOP duopoly the satisfaction of my sanction or endorsement come hell or high water.
It's the fault of you and people like you that Chuck Baldwin won't be our next President. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Unfortunately, the process is totally corrupt now and the ballot box worthless.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
The pre-destined policies of the cabal will NOT change over the next 4 years regardless which of their sock puppets they have selected to rule over us and usher in the final form of the North American Union. The crisis is on the way.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Either way, the question is a stupid one. It presumes that one candidate is in some way "better" than the other.
So now it is the nonvoters that will be blamed for not participating in this farce. Great. Fuck you for even suggesting it. Just a gool ol' plain and heartfelt FUCK YOU. But you go ahead and play your little role and cast your little "vote", and do feel free to blame nonvoters like me if Puppet #1 gets (s)elected if it makes you feel better. Then you can tell me how Puppet #2 would have been so much better. I'll be damned if I will let you or anyone else get away with blaming me or anyone else that will not play a game when the deck is already stacked against us. We are not responsible for this mess. Its the assholes that hope they are choosing the lesser evil instead of choosing the good that are responsible. And they will get exactly what they deserve.
Although you make general statements that both candidates are equally bad, you focus your actual criticisms only on McCain. Why is that?
A few months ago, this forum was infested with Obamaphiles, and I spent most of the time arguing with them. They asked me the same question as you do, only in reverse, and accused me of being a McCain supporter. Now that most of the Obamaphiles are gone (Ferret Mike is the only one I know of) and the forum is infested with McCain supporters, I naturally spend more time arguing with them. What's the point of arguing with people who don't post here any more?
Either way, the question is a stupid one. It presumes that one candidate is in some way "better" than the other. You think outside the cabal's matrix. That makes you dangerous. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
What do your and my children get ? That's what angers me the most. Mother F**kers.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
We are not responsible for this mess. Its the assholes that hope they are choosing the lesser evil instead of choosing the good that are responsible. And they will get exactly what they deserve. i couldn't agree more.
A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. — Lysander Spooner
Wow! I find it amazing that so many people are still undecided that are planning on voting. It is either McCain or Baldwin. The fact that I despise Obama is the only thing that makes me consider McCain. Baldwin isn't going to win no matter how much you me or anyone else wishes he would. That is just reality don't get mad at me for it.
Now that most of the Obamaphiles are gone (Ferret Mike is the only one I know of) and the forum is infested with McCain supporters, I naturally spend more time arguing with them. I'm not accusing you of anything. I was merely curious about why your general pronouncements did not match your actual criticisms of only one candidate. I wasn't active on the forum several months ago when evidently Obamaphiles were posting here. I have become more active on the forum this month, but I must say I don't see "an infestation" of McCain supporters.
I am not of the belief that any party owns anyones vote. People are free to vote for whoever they want to. I voted Peroutka in 2004.
Even if I vote for the guy?
If mcKein is the selection, do you want to have ownership in what's to come ? Same for the Otraitors. I will be clean of conscious; I'm voting and voting for an American who puts America first.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
I wasn't active on the forum several months ago when evidently Obamaphiles were posting here. I have become more active on the forum this month, but I must say I don't see "an infestation" of McCain supporters. I've had mcKein's number for so long I'm not sure I haven't pummeled every treasonous position he holds at least 3 times. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Even if I vote for the guy? At this point, I'm not even baffled anymore that you haven't already pulled that trigger. You must not totally understand the game.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
It is not a stupid question. It is a question that is very relevant today as election day is tomorrow. Unless it is your position that the candidates are equal to each other (Equal in the true meaning of the word) one has to be better. Is it your position that the history of the United States will be identical no matter which of these fools is elected. I don't think that they will have identical decisions as to the future of our country. So of course one of them is "better" or "less bad". To believe otherwise is illogical.
Fuck you for even suggesting it. Just a gool ol' plain and heartfelt FUCK YOU. But you go ahead and play your little role and cast your little "vote", and do feel free to blame nonvoters like me if Puppet #1 gets (s)elected if it makes you feel better. Then you can tell me how Puppet #2 would have been so much better. If you don't vote then you should shut up about it. You can't complain that your candidate didn't win. At least not in honesty. You also can't claim your vote was stolen as you didn't cast one. So what are you complaining about? Not voting puts you in the same category of TV zombies that just watch TV all day and don't do anything to make our country better. That is just my take on it don't get your panties all in a wad.
Anyone operating in the environment that you and I have for this long knows that the policies come from above the CFR/TRILAT/BILDERBERG owned tools like mcKein and Obamalamadingdong. They do as they're told. Nothing will change, just the social flavors of the week to keep the sheeple busy.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
The fucking twit that wrote this slop is about as intelligent as the fucking twit that posted this fucking bullshit. Third party voters votes are the third party voters to cast as they please. If you think that we hold the key to whether we get mcnutz or obanger, you are a fucking embicile. Do you really think one is better thaan the other and if so, I guess you believe both are better than Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin of some other candidate that has demonstrated they are far superior to either one of the fucking lousy establishment candidates. No go tell someone whithout an ounce of brain matter how you are still playing the same old political game that has gotten us into the mess we are in you sad piece of shit!
So Obama and McCain are exactly equal? No differences identical path they will take us on. I don't believe that. One of them is less evil. I believe that to be McCain.
I saw that game being played 8 years ago, with people going on how Bush is the "lesser evil" and a vote for Buchanan (or any other 3d party) is "a vote for Gore." Bush was not the lesser evil, he was as bad or possibly worse than Gore would have been. That's why talk about McCain vs. Obama being a "lesser evil" is also BS. The people who pretend that McCain is better on economics ignore the fact that he was on the same page as Obama on the bailout, just as people who think Obama would be better on foreign policy choose to ignore the fact that their candidate now says the same things about Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan as McCain and the neocons.
Old Friend. Why would anyone living in NJ, NY, CA, as examples, feel badly about not voting since the D wins by huge margins in those states any time an election is held? Also, since the Rs booted my ass out of the party years ago, why would I vote for them? A 3rd party vote makes no sense to me, but for those who feel compelled to vote, have at it. So to answer your question, no, non- voters aren't responsible for Obama. The country-club Republican Party is.
Same for the Otraitors. I will be clean of conscious; I'm voting and voting for an American who puts America first. I respect your position. It is the position that I have had for many years now. I am just openly questioning my thoughts on this subject. Believe me I am no McCain fan. I hated him in the debates. They way he had his cronines Guilianni and Thompson in there attacking Ron Paul for him. But Obama is far scarier so I am thinking about it.
Take care.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Think about the culture. Think about all the foreigners living in our country that support him. With McCain at least we can keep some of our culture. If Obama wins the culture is almost surely lost. I'm talking about the traces of it that are still here.
You've succumbed to the fear. I can't be of any further assistance now, God bless.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
How am I to "blame" for not partcipating in an evil system in which the votes aren't counted honestly anyway?
Ahmadinejad in 2008! I agree one hundred percent that people who vote third party are free to vote as they please. I don't consider them lesser patriotic or anything close to that. I'm just questioning if some of them may regret it after the fact. I regretted voting Perot for a while after Clinton was elected. After we learned more about what Bush was all about I no longer regret that vote. I don't know that I ever really regretted it buy more like doubts. I think there is a possibility that our votes will determine which one will be elected. I don't think any of them are better then Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin for that matter.
Because it's fun to ridicule their stoopidity and gullibility.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
McCain’s Incoherent New World Order McCain’s strange rhetoric about “North, Central, and South American life” reflects a view that nation-states are disappearing and being replaced by regional alliances and institutions. In his March 26 speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, McCain never mentioned the need to preserve American sovereignty. He could have reassured conservatives by stating his forthright opposition to Senate ratification of the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, which provides for international control over billions of dollars worth of oil, gas and minerals and undermines American claims to North Pole riches. But he chose not to. "If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. — Lysander Spooner
Ain't blowback a bitch? Both the Clintonite and Neocon Zionists who supported the "liberation" of Kosovo have earned exactly what they deserve.
That's very true. McCain is very transparent re: his flaws and foibles and anti-America voting positions and has been so for many years. With McCain what you see is what you get. But Obama is another kettle of fish. Finding information on his flaws and foibles takes quite a bit more work - there's not alot of federal Senate voting record on Obama. There's not alot of political activity even at the state level. We know little about his formative years except for what he chooses to reveal in his autiobiography. With Obama there's still a good deal to find out and we have only 1 day left. That's why I enjoy reading posted articles or posting articles I find on Obama - McCain is a known quantity but Obama is still buyer beware quantity. We can say that both candidates are equally bad. But that's not quite fair to say, because we know much about McCain but little about Obama.
I agree with you on states that have huge majorities either R or D. But what about a state like Ohio in which I reside? How did the R's boot you out of the party? If you are referring to no longer feeling welcome with their agenda and moving on then I understand and respect that 100 percent. I see your position on non voters not being responsible and I respect that. People have a right not to participate. I just wonder if some of them, you or others, may regret that someday if Obama turns our really really bad. Or the reverse question would also be fair if McCain were to be elected.
Comments (42 - 89) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Old Friend (#0)
Still undecided here. I guess I'll have to decide tomorrow.
#3. To: RickyJ, Old Friend (#1)
No. Obama voters alone are responsible if he is elected. Most third party voters would not vote for either McCain or Obama so their votes for third party candidates do not help or hurt either of the MSM candidates.
#4. To: Old Friend (#0)
(Edited)
Can we blame them for not voting McCain and at least trying to stop Obama. I suspect that if Obama is elected and these people who didn't vote may have some regret at some time in the future.
#5. To: wbales (#4)
(Edited)
#6. To: Old Friend (#0)
#7. To: RickyJ (#2)
Voting for anyone other than who you really want to be President is IMO, a wasted vote. Someday maybe Americans will realize this, however I am not going to hold my breath waiting for that day.
#8. To: wbales (#4)
Can we blame them for not voting Obama and at least trying to stop McCain.
#9. To: Rotara (#8)
Can we blame them for not voting Obama and at least trying to stop McCain.
#10. To: Old Friend, All (#0)
Are Non Voters and Non McCain Voters Responsible if Obama is Elected?
#11. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#9)
(Edited)
It presumes that one candidate is in some way "better" than the other.
#12. To: scrapper2 (#11)
(Edited)
Although you make general statements that both candidates are equally bad, you focus your actual criticisms only on McCain. Why is that?
#13. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#9)
Can we blame them for not voting Obama and at least trying to stop McCain.
#14. To: PSUSA (#10)
And they will get exactly what they deserve.
#15. To: PSUSA (#10)
I'll be damned if I will let you or anyone else get away with blaming me or anyone else that will not play a game when the deck is already stacked against us.
#16. To: RickyJ (#2)
Still undecided here. I guess I'll have to decide tomorrow.
#17. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#12)
A few months ago, this forum was infested with Obamaphiles, and I spent most of the time arguing with them. They asked me the same question as you do, only in reverse, and accused me of being a McCain supporter.
#18. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#3)
The Democrats and Republicans are arrogant bastards. They act as though they own and are somehow entitled to people's votes, and that any votes that go to third party candidates are somehow "stolen" from them.
#19. To: Rotara (#6)
It's the fault of you and people like you that Chuck Baldwin won't be our next President. ;-)
#20. To: Old Friend (#16)
It is either McCain or Baldwin. The fact that I despise Obama is the only thing that makes me consider McCain. Baldwin isn't going to win no matter how much you me or anyone else wishes he would. That is just reality don't get mad at me for it.
#21. To: scrapper2 (#17)
I'm not accusing you of anything. I was merely curious about why your general pronouncements did not match your actual criticisms of only one candidate.
#22. To: Old Friend (#19)
It's the fault of you and people like you that Chuck Baldwin won't be our next President. ;-)
#23. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#9)
Either way, the question is a stupid one. It presumes that one candidate is in some way "better" than the other.
#24. To: PSUSA (#10)
So now it is the nonvoters that will be blamed for not participating in this farce. Great.
#25. To: Old Friend (#23)
(Edited)
It is not a stupid question. It is a question that is very relevant today as election day is tomorrow. Unless it is your position that the candidates are equal to each other (Equal in the true meaning of the word) one has to be better. Is it your position that the history of the United States will be identical no matter which of these fools is elected. I don't think that they will have identical decisions as to the future of our country. So of course one of them is "better" or "less bad". To believe otherwise is illogical.
#26. To: Old Friend (#0)
#27. To: christine (#15)
i couldn't agree more.
#28. To: Old Friend (#23)
#29. To: Old Friend (#0)
(Edited)
#30. To: Rotara (#20)
If mcKein is the selection, do you want to have ownership in what's to come ?
#31. To: Old Friend (#27)
So Obama and McCain are exactly equal? No differences identical path they will take us on. I don't believe that. One of them is less evil. I believe that to be McCain.
#32. To: Rotara (#25)
Anyone operating in the environment that you and I have for this long know that the policies come from above the CFR/TRILAT/BILDERBERG owned tools like mcKein and Obamalamadingdong. They do as they're told. Nothing will change, just the social flavors of the week to keep the sheeple busy.
#33. To: Old Friend (#30)
I respect your position. It is the position that I have had for many years now. I am just openly questioning my thoughts on this subject. Believe me I am no McCain fan. I hated him in the debates. They way he had his cronines Guilianni and Thompson in there attacking Ron Paul for him. But Obama is far scarier so I am thinking about it.
#34. To: Old Friend (#0)
Everyone agrees that unanimity is hard to find.
#35. To: LACUMO (#26)
Third party voters votes are the third party voters to cast as they please. If you think that we hold the key to whether we get mcnutz or obanger, you are a fucking embicile. Do you really think one is better thaan the other and if so, I guess you believe both are better than Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin of some other candidate that has demonstrated they are far superior to either one of the fucking lousy establishment candidates.
#36. To: Rupert_Pupkin, Ferret Mike (#12)
Now that most of the Obamaphiles are gone (Ferret Mike is the only one I know of) and the forum is infested with McCain supporters, I naturally spend more time arguing with them. What's the point of arguing with people who don't post here any more?
#37. To: Old Friend (#32)
With McCain at least we can keep some of our culture.
McCain’s Incoherent New World Order
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | March 28, 2008
Instead, as the Washington Post put it, McCain promised “a collaborative foreign policy,” conducted in coordination with other nations. The New York Times said he distanced himself from “unilateralism” in foreign affairs.
“Liberals are going to love this speech,” conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh said about the McCain address. He said it sounded like the “global test” that liberal Democratic presidential candidate and Senator John Kerry had proposed for U.S. foreign policy in 2004.
Yet, McCain’s new TV ad calls him “the American president Americans have been waiting for.” The public should not be fooled. He is as much of a globalist as Hillary and Obama.
Noting that McCain committed himself to adoption of a new U.N.-sponsored global warming treaty, which would be even more comprehensive and tougher than the Kyoto Protocol, Limbaugh said that “The theme here is that there’s nothing special about America, and that we’re not going to be able to do anything without involving other nations and making them like us and showing them that we intend them no harm and that we want to be good stewards of the planet just as they want to be good stewards.”
The latter was a reference to McCain declaring that “We need to be good stewards of our planet and join with other nations to help preserve our common home. The risks of global warming have no borders.” McCain sounded like another Democrat53;Al Gore.
But despite his preference for what appears to be some kind of New World Order, McCain’s prior endorsement of a new Muslim state in Europe by the name of Kosovo could undermine all of his best-laid plans. Recognition of Kosovo could lead to war with Russia and more terrorist problems for Israel.
Scary Rhetoric
Bobby Eberle of GOPUSA commented, “Sen. McCain delivered a laundry list of all things non-conservative.” He said the speech wasn’t conservative or even Republican.
Amanda Teegarden, a grass roots pro-sovereignty activist, was also alarmed. “It is imperative that conservatives listen to this speech53;especially if you are concerned about the sovereignty, and the economic survival, of the United States,” she said.
In addition to a new global warming treaty, she noted that McCain’s proposals included open borders in the Western Hemisphere, nuclear disarmament, and a Transatlantic free trade area.
Eberle focused on a segment of the McCain speech that included the statement that “Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new 21st century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all.”
McCain’s strange rhetoric about “North, Central, and South American life” reflects a view that nation-states are disappearing and being replaced by regional alliances and institutions. He referred to “the powerful collective voice of the European Union,” as if the U.S. response would have to be submersion of our voice in a larger hemispheric entity. But McCain seems to be calling for something beyond even a North American Union (NAU) of the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. He talked about “creating the new international institutions necessary to advance the peace and freedoms we cherish,” as if they would be built on top of the EU and the NAU.
Earlier, McCain had declared, “With globalization, our hemisphere has grown closer, more integrated, and more interdependent. Latin America today is increasingly vital to the fortunes of the United States. Americans north and south share a common geography and a common destiny.” But why should trade with America’s neighbors necessarily lead to a “common destiny?” This implies a political merger of the U.S. with other countries.
Nuclear Disarmament
“We should work to reduce nuclear arsenals all around the world, starting with our own,” McCain said. This appeared to be a call for unilateral nuclear disarmament. He went on to call for the U.S. to lead “a global effort at nuclear disarmament.” This, too, seems to require more reliance on international institutions, in this case the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Indeed, McCain in the past has called for more funding for the IAEA.
McCain added, “We have to strengthen our global alliances as the core of a new global compact53;a League of Democracies53;that can harness the vast influence of the more than 100 democratic nations around the world to advance our values and defend our shared interests.” But as I noted in a recent piece, “McCain, Soros, and the New World Order,” this is a liberal project that is being currently funded by left-wing billionaire George Soros and managed by former Clinton officials. It has nothing to do with democracy but is intended to create another global institution that will eventually help strengthen the U.N.
After calling for the closing of the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (but not saying where he would put the detainees), McCain declared that “There is such a thing as international good citizenship.” This is the kind of rhetoric we would expect from an advocate of world government. If Hillary or Obama were spouting such silly rhetoric, conservatives would be laughing at them.
It goes without saying that McCain is oblivious to the evidence that the man-made global warming theory doesn’t hold up under serious scrutiny. His proposal for “a successor to the Kyoto Treaty” that “delivers the necessary environmental impact in an economically responsible manner” is potentially very damaging to the U.S. economy. But the proposal pleases the Europeans.
McCain talked about the virtues of the “transatlantic alliance,” which served a purpose during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, but went on to say that “Americans should welcome the rise of a strong, confident European Union as we continue to support a strong NATO.” The European Union was devised primarily as a counter to the influence of the U.S. in foreign affairs. It has also proven to be a bureaucratic disaster for the people of Europe. The “strong NATO” has proven to be extremely weak in Afghanistan, where it cannot field enough troops to defeat the Taliban terrorists. Expanding NATO has not resulted in making it stronger.
“The future of the transatlantic relationship lies in confronting the challenges of the twenty-first century worldwide: developing a common energy policy, creating a transatlantic common market tying our economies more closely together, addressing the dangers posed by a revanchist Russia, and institutionalizing our cooperation on issues such as climate change, foreign assistance, and democracy promotion,” declared McCain.
So not only is the U.S. going to move toward common policies for North, South and Central America, but it is going to develop common energy and economic policies with the European Union. Developing a common policy on “foreign assistance” is a recipe for more looting of the U.S. taxpayers. The Europeans have long complained that the U.S. isn’t devoting enough money to “official development assistance,” as the U.N. calls it.
Nightmare Vision
Does McCain’s vision look like an emerging world government? It is certainly a variation of “global governance,” which is the proposal that former Clinton State Department official Strobe Talbott makes in his book, The Great Experiment. Talbott calls McCain a “pragmatist” in foreign affairs, just like Obama and Hillary, and says that he expects his liberal Brookings Institution to have influence over a McCain presidency.
On other issues in his speech, McCain talked tough about Iran and Russia.
The big problem for McCain, as we noted in a recent column, is that his vision of a New World Order is incompatible with his support for making the Serbian province of Kosovo into an independent state. Carving Kosovo out of Serbia is a threat to international peace and security. It has split NATO, which McCain says he wants to expand and strengthen. This policy, which has also been embraced by the Democrats, threatens a completely unnecessary war with Russia, which backs Serbian control of Kosovo and wants to aid the Serbs remaining in the province.
McCain spoke about Israel’s survival, without addressing the reality that Kosovo’s independence has energized the Arab/Muslim push for a Palestinian state that could threaten Israel.
While McCain said that the threat of radical Islamic terrorism is “the transcendent challenge of our time,” he seemed unaware how some of those same forces are behind the push for Kosovo statehood. It just doesn’t make sense to fight Muslim extremists in one place, Iraq, while helping them in another, Kosovo, and even giving them their own state.
This is a contradiction that McCain has failed to address.
“We have incurred a moral responsibility in Iraq,” the Senator declared. “It would be an unconscionable act of betrayal, a stain on our character as a great nation, if we were to walk away from the Iraqi people and consign them to the horrendous violence, ethnic cleansing, and possibly genocide that would follow a reckless, irresponsible, and premature withdrawal.”
This rhetoric strikes a chord with conservatives. Yet, some say that genocide is already occurring in Iraq, in regard to the plight of Christians there. More than half have fled the country since the U.S. invasion, and those who remain are being kidnapped, threatened and murdered. Do we not have a moral responsibility to them? Shouldn’t the U.S. be less concerned about the survival of the Muslim government in Iraq and more concerned about the defenseless and unarmed Christians?
McCain seemed blind not only to the issues that conservatives regard as critical in an election year, but he went out of his way to reach out to liberals and Democrats. The only part of the speech they probably didn’t like was on Iraq.
But if the liberals get beyond their differences with McCain on Iraq, they will not only vote for him but promote his agenda as president. Then, as Rush Limbaugh notes, it may eventually be possible to change the name of the United States of America: “We’ll call ourselves New Europe.” In the process, true conservatism as a political force will be finished in the U.S.
The tragedy of this approach is that it comes from a man who served his country in uniform and risked his life on behalf of the U.S. McCain would have been a natural choice to lead a campaign for restoration of American sovereignty in foreign affairs. He could have been “The American President Americans have been waiting for.”
For reasons that remain largely a mystery, he has chosen to take the U.S. down the road of “global governance,” in which the U.N. and other international agencies, institutions and alliances determine our fate as a nation. It is the same road the Democrats are on. It is a tragedy for our country. 
#38. To: Old Friend (#27)
#39. To: Rotara (#37)
McCain spoke about Israel’s survival, without addressing the reality that Kosovo’s independence has energized the Arab/Muslim push for a Palestinian state that could threaten Israel.
#40. To: Rotara, Rupert_Pupkin (#21)
I've had mcKein's number for so long I'm not sure I haven't pummeled every treasonous position he holds at least 3 times. ;-)
#41. To: Jethro Tull (#29)
Why would anyone living in NJ, NY, CA, as examples, feel badly about not voting since the D wins by huge margins in those states any time an election is held? Also, since the Rs booted my ass out of the party years ago, why would I vote for them? A 3rd party vote makes no sense to me, but for those who feel compelled to vote, have at it. So to answer your question, no, non- voters aren't responsible for Obama. The country-club Republican Party is.
.
.
.