I'm going independent.

[JoeChalupa]

I've never voted straight ticket and after doing research on all candidates and policies and all I've decided that I really am an independent. Do I tend to lean more democratic? Yes, but it depends on the issues.

I don't agree with everything either major party endoreses as I'm sure the majority of us do. But all the partisan BS is downright ridiculous. The fact that a member of congress will catch hell for agreeing or working with a member of the opposite party is what has caused the majority of the problems in government.
If a democrat praises a republican they get bashed and vice-versa.

So I am now and independent who is backing Obama.

As Joe Scarborough says it...the democrat party doesn't own me....the republican party doesn't own me.

I'll call it as I see it and I may change who I am supporting depending on what I know.

Now.....come on independents.....let us BARACK THE VOTE!!

[RandomGuy]

I was an independent until about 2003.

I still have a McCain 2000 t-shirt in the closet somewhere...

BUT

I have officially thrown my hat in with the Dems. I think change can come from the inside, and hope to be one of the centrists that guide the party in a sensible direction.

The Bush presidency has cured me of any urge to vote for a Republican, probably for the rest of my life, unless the only opponent of that Republican is a Libertarian.

While there are a small number of Republicans I can respect, that number seems vanishingly small when people like Jerry Falwell weigh in.

To be sure the Dems have a few untasteful characters, but they are far from power. The Republicans have allowed their extremists to run the party and that is something we should all be concerned about.

[Nbadan]

Nothing wrong with calling yourself whatever you'd like, but the important thing is not to fall for partisan spin when making your decision about which candidate to back....realistically, Hitlary shouldn't even be in the race anymore...the only thing still feeding her candidacy is her own ego and that of her husband...there is no way she can win the delegate vote, and no way she can win the popular vote..plus, she's broke....so what's left? Does she really think that the super-delegates are going to go against the will of the people of the Party?

[ClingingMars]

While there are a small number of Republicans I can respect, that number seems vanishingly small when people like Jerry Falwell weigh in.

Falwell is dead, even if you disagree with someone, show some damn respect.

- Mars

[xrayzebra]

Boy, I have never seen so much chest thumping. Independent my
foot. No such animal. And those that are now claiming to be so
have shown who they favor. RG is the only honest person that has
posted in this thread.

I don't have to declare, you know my preference. I wouldn't
vote for either of the Socialist running on the dimm side. And
it makes me shudder to think either of them could be elected.

[RandomGuy]

Falwell is dead, even if you disagree with someone, show some damn respect.

- Mars

Oh yeah, I forgot about that bit.

(shrugs)

I am not sure what being dead has to do with respecting or not respecting what the guy said while he was alive.

He was an ass.

I won't say I am happy (I'm not) he is dead or anything distasteful like that. He was a human being after all, with a family and loved ones.

BUT

Neither will I pull any punches when it comes to what someone said/did while they were alive. Just because someone is not breathing doesn't make their words/deeds better/worse. Unless of course you were some sort of artist, then that seems to make them more valuable...

[some_user86]

I've never voted straight ticket and after doing research on all candidates and policies and all I've decided that I really am an independent. Do I tend to lean more democratic? Yes, but it depends on the issues.

I don't agree with everything either major party endoreses as I'm sure the majority of us do. But all the partisan BS is downright ridiculous. The fact that a member of congress will catch hell for agreeing or working with a member of the opposite party is what has caused the majority of the problems in government.
If a democrat praises a republican they get bashed and vice-versa.

So I am now and independent who is backing Obama.

As Joe Scarborough says it...the democrat party doesn't own me....the republican party doesn't own me.

I'll call it as I see it and I may change who I am supporting depending on what I know.

Now.....come on independents.....let us BARACK THE VOTE!!

Welcome!

[some_user86]

Falwell is dead, even if you disagree with someone, show some damn respect.

- Mars

No.

[JoeChalupa]

Nothing wrong with calling yourself whatever you'd like, but the important thing is not to fall for partisan spin when making your decision about which candidate to back....realistically, Hitlary shouldn't even be in the race anymore...the only thing still feeding her candidacy is her own ego and that of her husband...there is no way she can win the delegate vote, and no way she can win the popular vote..plus, she's broke....so what's left? Does she really think that the super-delegates are going to go against the will of the people of the Party?


I disagree. She makes a valid point that Obama cannot close the deal. If the majority of democrats supports support Obama and truly wanted her out they could have said so by their votes and instead they voted to support her by a wide margin and I see her picking up Obamamentum and I DO think that the super delegates may go with the "general election" thinking and give the nomination to Hillary.

I do like McCain but I need to hear him more when he goes up against the democratic nominee.

[RandomGuy]

I disagree. She makes a valid point that Obama cannot close the deal. If the majority of democrats supports support Obama and truly wanted her out they could have said so by their votes and instead they voted to support her by a wide margin and I see her picking up Obamamentum and I DO think that the super delegates may go with the "general election" thinking and give the nomination to Hillary.

I do like McCain but I need to hear him more when he goes up against the democratic nominee.

I liked McCain right up to the point where he started going along with this administration on torture.

I wasn't going to vote for him either way, but his support of the administration on this issue put to rest any lingering doubts I had.

[RandomGuy]

Source article (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/us/politics/17torture.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)

or if you prefer:

Here (http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1729891,00.html)

[101A]

I wasn't going to vote for him either way,...

ahhhhhh. There's the rub.

He didn't lose you're vote, but might very well have gained some others. Ain't Democracy grand?

[RandomGuy]

ahhhhhh. There's the rub.

He didn't lose you're vote, but might very well have gained some others. Ain't Democracy grand?

"Our leader got more votes from the American population by supporting torture."

That's something to be proud of?

(shrugs)

If he gets elected, we will, in essence, be condoning that behavior. Ick.

[101A]

"Our leader got more votes from the American population by supporting torture."

That's something to be proud of?

(shrugs)

If he gets elected, we will, in essence, be condoning that behavior. Ick.

My point being; most politicians, especially ones in what promise to be close elections pick there state policy positions carefully; you weren't going to vote for him anyway, so pissing you off is doesn't really matter, right?

You're not going to see Barrack or Hillary come out and oppose late term abortions any time soon, you know.

I think those are pretty "icky" myself.

[RandomGuy]

My point being; most politicians, especially ones in what promise to be close elections pick there state policy positions carefully; you weren't going to vote for him anyway, so pissing you off is doesn't really matter, right?

You're not going to see Barrack or Hillary come out and oppose late term abortions any time soon, you know.

I think those are pretty "icky" myself.

Indeed. All good points. :toast

But I doubt AQ will be advertising a Democratic president's stand on abortion when pointing to how evil America is on their websites.

...or maybe they will. I find it diconcerting that their views on "liberals" sounds eerily like that of some evangelicals. Ask any AQ about the evils of secularism, and you will get an earful.

[101A]

Indeed. All good points. :toast

But I doubt AQ will be advertising a Democratic president's stand on abortion when pointing to how evil America is on their websites.

...or maybe they will. I find it diconcerting that their views on "liberals" sounds eerily like that of some evangelicals. Ask any AQ about the evils of secularism, and you will get an earful.


Oh, I think there's enough hate from AQ to go around.

[ClingingMars]

Oh yeah, I forgot about that bit.

(shrugs)

I am not sure what being dead has to do with respecting or not respecting what the guy said while he was alive.

He was an ass.

I won't say I am happy (I'm not) he is dead or anything distasteful like that. He was a human being after all, with a family and loved ones.

BUT

Neither will I pull any punches when it comes to what someone said/did while they were alive. Just because someone is not breathing doesn't make their words/deeds better/worse. Unless of course you were some sort of artist, then that seems to make them more valuable...

He wasn't an ass. If you wanna call somebody an ass, that's Robertson. and yes, I'm a Evangelical Conservative Republican, but I have lost complete respect for Robertson because he has sold out.

I live in Virginia and have seen the stuff he's done for kids at Liberty and kids trying to pay for Liberty. You may not agree with his beliefs or what he said, but he wasn't an ass.

- Mars

[JoeChalupa]

I liked McCain right up to the point where he started going along with this administration on torture.

I wasn't going to vote for him either way, but his support of the administration on this issue put to rest any lingering doubts I had.

I feel the same. I like McCain because he is not afraid to go against his party and even conservatives, although he is going to have to cater to them, and that is what I liked about him. But his views on some issues are too much for me to vote for him....right now that is.

[Ocotillo]

I like McCain because he is not afraid to go against his party and even conservatives, although he is going to have to cater to them, and that is what I liked about him.

He caves every time he takes some 'maverick' position whether it be opposing the Bush tax cuts or torture. McCain is McSame and a McCain presidency will only differ from Bush in that he won't come across as arrogant as Bush. Rest assured, Iraq will rage on and he try to implement every extremist conservative policy he can. No to McCain!

[Ocotillo]

Also the Supreme Court will be stacked with extremist right wing kooks for decades.

[jochhejaam]

Also the Supreme Court will be stacked with extremist right wing kooks for decades.

What are the specifics that compel you to label the conservative Justices' "kooks"?

[Don Quixote]

Indeed. All good points. :toast

But I doubt AQ will be advertising a Democratic president's stand on abortion when pointing to how evil America is on their websites.

...or maybe they will. I find it disconcerting that their views on "liberals" sounds eerily like that of some evangelicals. Ask any AQ about the evils of secularism, and you will get an earful.

There may be a few evangelicals who fear secularism and speak badly about it. It's because they've confused the dual institutions of church and state. A better position would be to reject secularism in the church, but cultivate a secular government that allows for pluralism and the open exchange of ideas.

In other words, an evangelical ought not want a "Christian" government, because (a) it will inevitably water down the gospel message and corrupt the church, and (b) it violates the establishment clause anyway. In fact, it was the early Baptists who fought the most diligently against state-run churches in Europe and colonial America.

But ... this is not to say that Christians can't and ought not to bring their religiously-informed views to the table. Everyone else does!

P.S. I would recommend Richard Land's Divided States of America? for a fleshed-out explanation of this church-state ethic.

[ClingingMars]

i think Ocotillo is one of those guys who went into hiding when Reagan was president.

- Mars

[BonnerDynasty]

dance puppet!

[Don Quixote]

:lol

Fine ...
by "rejecting secularism in the church" I mean that the church needs to be the church, by preaching the Gospel, holding to orthodox doctrine, and upholding and living out moral values as taught by the scriptures. This may come as a shocker, but a good chunk of Protestantism, and some of the Catholic church, is known more for its social action than for any real religious content that they might hold to.

My statement was intended to draw a contrast where secularism is appropriate (gummint) and where it is not (the church).