[...] Fred On The GITMO Ruling [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Actually, the thought that a vote for Ambassador Alan Keyes, or any other third party or Independent candidate being a wasted vote is wrong.

It’s a grand lie repeated over and over by party political machines, but; it’s as false as a three dollar bill.

The only truly wasted vote is a vote cast by a voter for the Democratic or Republican candidate in a decidedly red or blue state where the vote obviously wont make a difference in the outcome and doesn’t really represent the voters conscience.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

When you vote for a candidate you make a covenant bond with that person to be your representative. If you covenant with a person who doesn’t represent you in a representative form of government; you get no representation and deny the candidate that does represent you of having a voice and or mandate as your representative.

There are 6 states where the presidential race is entirely up for grabs. In those six states conservatives and pro life voters can compromise their beliefs and convictions hoping to get Senator John the Neo-Con elected and hope his newly found conservative talk doesn’t take the Republican Party so far left the Republican Party will never feel the need to seek the conservative and pro life voting base again should he actually be elected.

John McCain won’t have any coattails, will have a Democratic Party led Congress & Senate thanks to the lack of Bush Jr coattails, and if elected president will have voters hating the Republican Party in 2012. This may be a case of needing to lose a battle to win a war. If Obama wins the presidency then voters will be angry at the democratic Party for not delivering on their promises, especially the one where democratic Party candidates in 2006 said they were bringing the troops home now. According to polls, that promise is still high on the peoples minds.

Ironically; more than 50% of the conservative base decided not to vote in the Republican Primary this time around. They didn’t follow Pat Roberston to Rudy Guiliani in the compromise for judicial appointments. They didn’t follow any of the endorsers to newly declared conservative Mitt Romney. They didn’t even follow George Bush Jr to embrace Bush’s hated enemy of 2000 John McCain. They will most likely continue following Dr James Dobson who last said “I will not vote for John McCain”.

It’s not a matter of whether conservatives can be moved to vote for left leaning John the Republican’s favorite son neo-con. They won’t. Conservatives are firmly convinced in their convictions and will not waiver. It’s just a matter of whether or not they will know there are conservatives on the ballot they can vote for and that by voting Independent or third party it can give them a voice or even a mandate depending on the outcome of the vote stats.

For those who think they will get judges appointed by McCain that are conservative, pro life and will overturn Roe vs Wade; if you couldn’t get conservative, pro life, Christian President George Bush Jr with a Republican House & Senate to use an executive order to overturn Roe & Doe; what makes you think that Bush’s arch nemesis of the left will grant your three wishes with a Democratic led House & Senate as he reaches across the fence to get things done?

We all know that Roe vs Wade was nothing but a sham of lies by NARAL (as testified to by NARAL founder Dr Bernard Nathanson) and Norma McCorvey (Jane Doe). Bush could have used the signing statements he racked up more of than all the other presidents combined bypassing Constitutional checks & Balances and or an executive order to overturn Roe. McCain is far left of the Bush family.

My family and I will be voting outside the lesser of two evils. Abstaining from all appearances of evil is our motto this election year. As Ambassadors of Christ we just don’t think we can represent our Creator by covenanting with John McCain. We live in a decidedly red state anyway and want our vote to empower conservative issues and views so that we have a voice in what happens from now through the 2012 elections.

Vote your conscience. If you follow the masses its like being a sled dog. Unless you are the leader out in front; the view always remains the same.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Well Chet, I’ve lived in Illinois for almost 60 years and worked as a campaign coordinator for my very conservative Republican congressman during that election. Keyes was easily distracted by the press and they took advantage of his rambling, unfortunately, we did a lot of wincing at the time.

He’s an impressive values speaker, but lacked the discipline needed to campaign, especially in a very blue state in a three month time frame.

Never been a fan of Zorn, but much of what he wrote in this article is true:

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2005/11/column_gone_and.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0

#17 – Actually Missy, Keyes ran a great campaign in Illinois. He won every debate he entered. He just wasn’t given a fair shake.

No, the only one(s) to lose in Illinois, are the people of that great state where I was born.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I can handle voting for someone or something I believe in, even if a liberal like Obama gets into office, because I know I would have done all I can to keep him out of office. What I couldn’t handle is voting for someone or something I know is wrong for this country, which conceivably could do as much damage (if not more), than the liberal candidate.

If all McCain has going for him is that he’s promised to appoint conservative judges, and he has a proven track record of being a maverick or turning his back on those you would think he’d be supporting, a people would be doing irreparable damage to our country by placing him in a position to do just that.

No, I want a person in there that supports the Constitution, that supports the Declaration of Independence, that I know will appoint conservative judges, that will protect the unborn rather than turning it over to the states to make that decision, that will protect the family, and will do all that he possibly can to protect this nation militarily. There are no such guarantees with or in the two we’ve been handed.

The folks at Self Government have been working hard at giving this nation an alternative to no alternative. We’re working hard at presenting an alternative to the GOP, which for all practical purposes has morphed into the DNC, a place where true conservatives can group or regroup, and plan a strategy for taking back America.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I like Keyes, his speeches are dynamic, but he ran an inept Senate campaign in Illinois, it was embarassing and now Obama is my Senator. It is not helpful for him to be in this race either.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

With regard to combatant status (#7), those standards have been set by the Geneva Convention and the US Law of Land Warfare. ChrisG, on more than one occasion, has written on these standards and how they are applied. Those enemy combatants captured on the battlefield are not entitled to constitutional protections. And, while these enemy combatants do not wear a uniform and do not represent an enemy nation, they are not entitled to prisoner of war status. As enemy combatants, nonetheless, are treated much in the same manner as EPWs (enemy prisoner of war). In general, most enemy combatants are classified as unlawful combatants because they act outside and violate the rules of war. The impact of this decision remains to be seen in the long term, it clearly tosses aside the GC and Law of Land Warfare in favor of some unknown, undefined standard.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mata,

I’ve been reading off and on today, when taking a break from the heat outside, and I keep coming back to the Exception Clause as my sticking point.

The Justices seemed to have completely glossed right over that in their ruling.

To me, and to virtually all of the authors that I have read today, that clause should have stopped the Court from even hearing the case.

Have you come up with anything today?

(We may want to go back to the original thread so that this stuff is all in one place.)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I agree with most here that judicial appointments… a reality for the next POTUS… are important. I am, however, reticient to bet on either the majority candidates’ choices. And, in fact as Dave Noble is quite right. Three of the concurring justices were GOP appointees.

Uh, that helped us how? LOL

What would be a grave danger is to swing the court balance to either side too heavily. Neither should be in absolute control, as this country has always been more proficient, efficient and well represented with healthy dissent. And with either POTUS appointees, we should be screaming at our Congress to insure balanced representation of the spectrum of beliefs in this country.

Dave Nobel… the traditional approach to handling foreign detainees held outside of the US is Johnson v Eisentrager, which is linked in my “The Road to” post. Since you’re reading up on this, you may also want to read thru this Harvard Law Review article by Richard Fallon and Daniel Meltzer. Starting on pg 27 of the PDF is relevant.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Chet,

I have to agree with Mike here.

Unfortunately, Keyes will not receive the number of votes needed to defeat either McCain or Obam-uhh and ultimately every vote Keyes gets is one that McCain will not.

Remember Ross Perot? I voted for him and you see what happened. If he hadn’t been in the race, or if his voters had been smarter, we wouldn’t have had Clintoon. (By the way, don’t hassle me over the Perot vote…I was far, far to young and naive to know any better.)

I, too, like Keyes’ message. I like Barr on a lot of things as well, but neither will be the ultimate winner in November and supporting them in the voting booth will simply roll the carpet out for Obam-uhh.

Like or Dislike: 0  0