Wouldn’t “CINO” (conservative in name only) be more accurate? The Republicans, by and large, are only “conservative” in comparrison to most Democrats… and that’s exactly how their base wants them.

Well if I have to vote this comming Nov. Then it’ll be a write-in. Wasted vote only if there is no push for a real write-in Conservative. Jim I’ll be writing in your name if I have too. If some write-in gets 20%-30%, that will make them stand up and take notice. I too will not hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. Good thing I work with numbers, no need to learn Spanish. Yes I was a FredHead, only not everyone wanted some one running a different style of campaign. So I was find with voting for Mitt.  A step down, but I was willing to deal with his flaws. But I say NO Mac and NO Huckleberry.

It isn’t a case of sitting out the election. It’s just that there is a certain minimum standard my President must meet, and a candidate who:

1) wants to get rid of Gitmo and give those terrorists a crack at our criminal courts system and Constitutional protections;

2) would grant a general amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants;

3) has consistently poked a thumb in the eye of his President and his party (trying to appear as a “maverick” on many issues); AND,

4) raise taxes on gasoline, while simultaneously forbidding any oil development in ANWR

just doesn’t meet the standards I would expect of a President that purportedly claims to be conservative. And doesn’t earn enough of my support for me to commit a vote.

I will go and vote for every office BUT President and hope to take back one House of Congress, because if Hillary were to put forward any of these items, the Congressional Republicans would do their best to overcome it, on general principles.

If McAmnesty puts it out there, do you really think that the Dems would oppose it?

McCain has gained the endorsement of the NYTimes and Bill Clinton, fercrissake!

I think Chris Muir pretty much sums up our lives right now:
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/2008/02/08/#004492

UGH...can i puhllllllleeeeeeze be put in to cryogenic sleep now?

I’m telling ya. Write-in for Alan Smithee.

Did Romney outright quit, or did he just suspend his campaign until the convention, hoping to snag electoral votes? I can’t tell from the wording of all this crap.

If they “suspend” the campaign, then money can still be disbursed for bills and payroll while they finish closing things out.

I take Rachel’s comments, but offer this twist:

We are getting one of the dogs, but instead of a dog, we’ll call it a home invader, and instead of getting bit, we ARE going to get shot.  The choice is pretty much whether we spend six days in the hospital or five.  What I say is this:  After we get out of the hospital, do we get a home security system (and, dare I say it, a dog of our own), or do we get robbed and shot again?

Until there are term limits in congress we will keep getting the government we have. The primary concern of EVERY politician today is re-election. Until we have a system where the people in congress know they are there for a limited amount of time two things will not happen:
1) No one in congress will have principles and stand on them
2) We the People will never retake ownership of our government
(Also the media will be able to sway public opinion however they want)

The founding Fathers saw serving as a duty and an inconvenience, NOT A CAREER! If these guys are gone every 6 or 10 years we will have fresh blood in there, serving because they believe in something and not just so they don’t have to go find a real job. No way McCain gets elected POTUS after his second term and by now he’d be on the board of some company and out of politics.

This election is a monkey fucking a football and we will pay for it for quite a while. In short, we are now screwed!

We the People will never retake ownership of our government

Revolution by 2025. Remember who said it…

Someone commented over on Lee’s blog that one suggestion might be that there wouldn’t be absolute term limits term limits, like there is on the Presidency, but every 3rd election you can’t run (3 out of 5). You could get back in on the 4th election if people will have you back. There is definitely benefit to having longer serving members, I think.. institutional memory can be a valuable resource. But they should have to earn it and not just coast on incumbency. It is the same up here.. a lot of lifers.

I suspect there is always the loyalty pull for politicians.. is your first priority the “greater good” (i.e. an over arching philosophy as to how the make the country better), the party, or the people who elected you? I suspect for most politicians it is a blend of the three, but the job security comes from those who give you the job.

There is definitely benefit to having longer serving members, I think.. institutional memory can be a valuable resource. But they should have to earn it and not just coast on incumbency.

Institutional memory can be served by old members being advisers. As long as re-election can remain a goal in any form we will get the same crap we have now.

Do you really think that a single Republican would vote to pass a program to drop billions of dollars out of airplanes because we have 5% unemployment if they didn’t care about getting re-elected?

The Republicans are behaving like the Dems simply because the Dems have always chased power by using the peoples money and the Republicans are just starting following their lead. If there were term limits people like those here might actually serve. In our Founding Fathers time, someone like JimK wouldn’t be content writing an article to espouse his views, he would run for office and DO something about them. I know things have changed (and JimK is DOING something with his blogs)but remember what the Founding Fathers were able to foresee. If they knew then that you would have a Senator in office for over 40 years I will bet anything they would have written term limits into the Constitution . They knew they didn’t want the Supreme court to have to worry about making decisions based on politics but they never could have guessed congress would end up the way it has now. Congress is slowly becoming a dictatorship and only the uber-rich voices are being heard.

They would have given their lives to prevent what we are becoming. I wonder what we today are willing to do to prevent it.