Sure you tell me what the Conservative philosophy is, cause the Goldwater philosphy of Conservatism is dying with this new and dangerous neo-conservatism.

I don't think I said I didn't like her. I have friends who hunt. I just don't get it, and it's not for me. I don't think anyone who finds pleasure in killing has any place in a leadership role, unless it's mercenary teachers.

I don't know if she will be our next VP. I have to admire her for getting this far as a woman, but I don't have to vote for her. She doesn't share many of my values..and isn't that what we use as our direction? Not just because she's Republican...but does she reflect any of our heartfelt values?
Can you blindly place your country, your family, yourself in the hands of someone JUST BECAUSE they are with your political party? Don't you have to have something there that you actually agree with? I am hoping that we have a decent world to leave to our children....I don't think the past 8 years have been conducive to that, and I don't think another four with McCain will change that. Just MHO!

I would pray to God we would have a higher standard for selecting a VP then a person hunts and eat red meat.

But if you want just one reason then please take alook at this. Thank you.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm#Foreign_Policy

Considering how critical it is to have some sort of foreign policy I find it disheartening that Sen. McCain would choose solemner who has none. In fact when she was asked about one of the most critical issues of our day the Iraq war this is what she had to say:

"I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq"

Sorry as one who is serving in the Military thats a no-go. I understand that being the Gov of Alsaka is her primary responsibility but that responsibility also includes being the Commander in Chief of the Alaskan National Guard. And those units cannot be deployed unless she signs off on it. In other words she blindly signed off on the deployment orders of her troops without focusing on it. And now we are told she is more then capable of stepping into John McCain shoes if God for bid he dies? We are told she is morethen capable of dealing with terroism? We are told she is more then capable of dealing with the Russian threat?

Please understand this selection is far more serious then you may think. Sen is 72 years old. Ronald Regen was 73 when he was inaugurated his SECOND TIME. John McCain will be the oldest person to become president, so his selection of VP is very important, probably abit more important then Obama's cause the odds of Palin succeeding McCain are better then Biden suceeding Obama.

Yet the senator didnt place the good of the nation as he likes to say "Country first" no he placed the political gain ahead of the nation.

For Sen. McCain he felt a hunting red meat eating, creation fable beliveing first term Governor of a state whose population is one quarter that of Brooklyn NY was more important to galvanize the Christian Right base then slecting soemone competent.

In a previous post I listed people such as Rice, Dole, Hutchinson, Romney and Powell can any of you tell me that Palin is more qualified then the people on my list? If you want to argue "Well they are all legislators."Fine how about Gov. Pawlty, or Gov Rick Perry. How about Jeb Bush? He solves all their problems beloved by the Christian Right and a Chief Executive..

Yet no. He met Gov Palin for one day and felt this is the person who is best capable of leading our nation should he die. Politics aside do any of you honestly believe that?

Well, Nova, you're talking factual proof of a candidate's position on an issue. Somehow I doubt that was what the initial poster on this issue was really looking for.

Abortion in general is a complicated, difficult and ultimately sad issue. It is unfortunate that those with little or no knowledge of, or experience with, the issue choose to use it for political point-scoring.

Yes, Bob, as a matter of fact, I do. That term may only apply to one individual rather than to a group, but it is disrespectful, unnecessary and cheapens what apparently passes for political debate around here. It goes without saying that I am not above taking the occassional cheap shot - that doesn't make it proper behavior. In general I don't expect much better from many, if not most, on this site, as that's about all they have to work with. But there are some, and in my opinion pug is among them, who are capable of far better.

I do agree with you on the abortion issue, LA, at least what you have posted so far. It is a very sad issue, and should NOT be a part of a political platform.

You have stated "In general I don't expect much better from many, if not most, on this site, as that's about all they have to work with"

Should I be insulted? I think you have just, in a "round about way", called some, if not most of us, unable to participate in an intelligent argument without resorting to name calling.

I wonder...does it get lonely on that pedestal, LA?

Draven, Most of the conservatives on this board agree that we are not over joyed with McCain. Most of us were not overjoyed with Bush for the last 8 years either. The war is only one reason. I gave up my membership in the RNC a few years ago and have refused to contribute to McCain. Locally I have always been listed as unenrolled. There are so few Republicans in my state that I wouldn't have anyone to vote for in the primaries.

The problem is, we have to look at what is best for the USA and it ain't Obama. If he was CINC 6 months ago we would have lost the war in Iraq after all the blood & treasure spent there. Right now we would be witnessing total chaos there and thousands more lives lost. At least now it looks like there is a chance for some good to come out of this.

McCain would hopefully hold the line on spending. Something that Bush failed in. With Obama in, we go back to all 3 branches of gov. controlled by Liberals, and his list of spending just over whelms me. McCain probably is not going to get a lot done because of congress and the senate but I don't think he will be afraid to use the Bully pulpit and veto power. (on some issues there are enough of conserve democrats)

Energy is going to be the biggest issue coming up. The Dept. of Energy claims optimistically that wind will contribute 30% of our power by 2030 Solar in the single numbers. Nuclear, Oil & Coal are off the table with OB. Gas might as well be, you need to drill. Where the hell are we going to get out energy from? Don't tell me conservation. I don't want to go back to a cave. I want jobs which are directly related to energy and its cost. I want heat on a cold night and AC on a hot day. Again, where is all this energy going to come from?

As far as I'm concerned, calling him McBush or McSame highlights his philosophy towards governing, more of the same failed policies of the last 8 years. In all actuality, he seems to be even more radical than the current administration as his pick for VP demonstrates. The McCain of old may have had some credibility, which one could argue seperately, but the current one has pandered to the most fringe elements of the republican party.
His knee jerk reaction to world events is not the quality I would look for when selecting the person closest to 'the button'. Nor is his attitude towards those less fortunate than having married into a family worth $100 Million.

Ragman,
If Obama was CINC 5 years ago, we wouldn't have gone into Iraq as they had nothing to do with 9/11. He would have gone into Afghanistan and finished the job there. Saddam was contained, there were no WMD's as was made clear by the inspectors, which if I'm not mistaken, were taken out of the country by Bush before they could finish the job because he was in such a hurry to blow some things up. We were taken to war in Iraq on lies, that much has become apparent.

Good for you, Leah Ann, that was the answer I was hoping for.

I thought the inspectors were UN. Hmmm. I also remember them, when on site were prevented from inspecting certain areas, were told what and where and when they could inspect, and shuttled back and forth. Hmmm, must have been what the UN sanctions were all about. Too bad the UN was toothless, they could have done the job. It's not like Saddam had ever used any WMD or anything.