I'm assuming there are some of you out there....
When '08 comes around is you anti-war position enough to make you cross party lines and vote for a democrat, or will you vote for a pro-war republican? Just wondering where the priorities lie...
2006-09-03 05:28:53 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Vote Libertarian!
2006-09-03 05:32:29 · answer #1 · answered by chris 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
My priorities lie outside the simplistic "anti-war" and "pro-war" labels. I'm anti-war in the sense that I hope we'll become civilized enough to never have another war. I'm pro-war in the sense that I think there are times and places where killing people and breaking things is not only justifiable, but moral.
Those anti- and pro- labels are useful shorthand, but they are also misleadingly inadequate.
As far as crossing lines, forget the lines. Vote "no" to every incumbent running for election this year, and keep voting "no" to the incumbents until we get a government that can perform all its duties properly.
JMB
2006-09-03 05:40:49 · answer #2 · answered by levyrat 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Those that voted for Bush the last two times would vote for him again if they could. It is sad but in fact true. Republicans do not care in the least what is best for America. They care about tax cuts for the wealthy nothing more. They also care about ending the death tax on the rich parents. That is about greed. It is also fact that they do not care about Bush being a proven liar, they have no moral base in voting the person over the party.
2006-09-03 05:37:45 · answer #3 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
History if you please...WW1, democrat...WW2, democrat...Korea, democrat...Viet-Nam, democrat.
"79 surrender to fanatics taking over Iran, democrat. The "93 W/T.C. bombing and the dozen in the next six years, democrat.
History will credit Carter with starting WW3 in 1979, and progressively blame administrations that did not confront the threat aggressively...Then blame George Bush for seeing what the problem is and addressing it?
2006-09-03 06:50:15 · answer #4 · answered by trumain 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's time for you all to draw a dam line in the sand .it don't dam matter if it's Dem's or Republicans the USA have some very serious matter on what to do about health care /illegal ./security of our borders /Iran etc.I'm sick of hearing all this stuff on Dem's rep alike .vote for the ones that is big enough to put politics aside and the well fare of this country first .you peoples seam to think it's all about you or you dam party .it's not it's about this country
2006-09-03 05:37:00 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Republicans are just a bunch of lemmings
who guzzle down Bush's magic Jesus Juice.
Gay Jeff Gannon could run for prez and they
would be hypocrites and vote for the sake of
voting Repugliscum.
2006-09-03 05:32:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Do you actually ought to ask? :-) heavily, i imagine of both substantial activities are more effective distinct than they're many circumstances given credit for, as journalist E.J. Dionne suggested before in his e book "Why persons Hate Politics." There are Libertarians interior the Republican party - Ron Paul, as an party -- who truly do unlike US military interventions foreign places more effective regularly than no longer. also, there are "Paleoconservatives" alongside with Pat Buchanan who're truly extreme of yankee military and economic guidelines that they see as being truly regularly designed to assist Israel. regardless of if the "Paleoconservatives" are honestly anti-Semitic or no longer, they many circumstances see American military adventures interior the middle East as being pushed via creating use of a Zionist good judgment that they imagine of is incompatible with the nationwide activity. also, to be precise, we've some "white nationalist" or outright rightwing racist commenters in YA Politics who seem channeling the Ku Klux Klan or its via-product communities. authentic to custom, they're brazenly anti-semitic and have a tendency to ascertain "liberal" foreign places guidelines in optimal situations as being pushed via creating use of an illegitimate Zionist schedule. i do not see Newt Gingrich as having any honestly political or moral concepts in any appreciate; i imagine of he's really always spinning the problem concerns for his very own political benefit. in spite of the straightforward shown reality that it really is situation-loose to imagine of that the libertarians, the Paleoconservatives & the a ways perfect racists interior the GOP ought to all oppose US intervention in Libya because of the very shown reality that helps some imaginary "new international order." yet Newt is largely being an inconsistent opportunist, i imagine of. -- democratic socialist / ambivalent on the Libyan question
2016-12-06 07:38:32 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We should support Pat Buchanan and rally all the traditional republicans who reluctantly went along with the Bush agenda.
2006-09-03 05:32:53 · answer #8 · answered by Eric H 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The only thing worse than wishy washy republicans is any democrat.
2006-09-03 05:42:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Republicans conform. They don't stray. They will vote the party line.
2006-09-03 05:34:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋