Gov. Sarah Palin's acceptance speech

[tstew]

Originally Posted by Ferd

and I am saying that I am voting for McCain because he is the closest thing to the above for me. period.

and in the greater scope, only republicans meet my standard right now.

Ferd, but I know alot of Americans that think like you do and whose standards match yours, and if we all just remain in our partisan sandboxes and not make our vote match the policies we actually want to see...we are all losers.

I don't believe that McCain feels like he has to do what the majority want him to do about immigration and other issues because he knows that 90% of the people on this forum do have a Republican or bust mentality...so what's the point of working for it.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Mike/Stew let me tell you why I am a partisan.

I believe in keeping taxes low on everybody (the rich too). I believe in getting taxes lower for businesses because high taxes force manufacturing jobs over seas, increace the cost of goods and services and reduce the number of people a business can employ.

I believe in putting people on the supreme court who will NOT create legislation out of thin air.

I believe that a person should have a right to both join a union and also to keep a job or get a job without being forced to join a union.

I belive in a strong military and that losing in Iraq is a horrible reality that makes America both weaker and more vulnerable to islamic terrorist attack.

I believe that you cannot make the economy stronger by taking money out of the economy and handing it to the government.

I believe that we must drill for oil in America and cut off the middle east.

I believe that the government spends far too much and needs to stop spending like drunken sailors.

I believe that while the cost of healthcare is too high, the fix does not include socializing 1/5 of the American economy.

I do not believe the Republicans have accomplished all or even most of this, but I do know that ONLY the Republicans are the only ones who can do this.

I am pragmatic enought to realize the main reason these things have not gotten done completely since 1980 when the conservitive movement really formed, is because there are enough Americans that DO NOT agree with me at all.

This is the tug of war.


I am also pragmatic enough to believe that some Republicans (and many recently) who either believe these things or have said they do, have flinced and backed down.
while I believe those people need to be replaced, I do not believe you replace them with someone who will work to prevent everything I believe in from happening.

So, I vote for republicans and will work to get rid of bad republicans by replacing them with other republicans.

I am a partisian republican because I will NOT vote for someone, or find political value in someone who believes the opposite of what I believe.


So, call me a partisian. but dont be bewildered when i dont buy it when a democrat talks about change and being different when they clearly believe in exactly the opposite of what I believe and have said as much.


love you guys.


PS, I am also a partisian republican because voting for Bob Barr will get Barak Obama elected.

Ferd, I respect your opinion and I think you know that. I don't question your motives at all. I know you want what's best for the country and that unites you and I.

I simply have had enough of the fiscal liberals that have taken over the Republican party. They've plunged this country in to trillions of dollars of needless debt. While we borrow money from the Chinese, our "friends" the Iraqi's have a $79 billion dollar surplus. It's foolish.

Instead of pre-emptively striking countries that have NOT provoked us(Saddam Hussein hated Bin laden and qaeda), our resources would have been much better spent on finding alternative fuels, and securing our borders.

The party of Lincoln now believes that tapping my phone without a warrant is above board. Forget that quaint document, the Constitution and all my pertaining rights under the law. The Republican party of the last 8 years has also decided that torturing enemy captives is acceptable.

There comes a point when a party simply gets too far off base and a message has to be sent. I've chosen to not blindly support a party who's left it's true north and take a stand on principle.

I'm not condeming or criticizing anyone for not agreeing with me. I just retain the right to vote my principles until someone gets our message.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

Ferd, I respect your opinion and I think you know that. I don't question your motives at all. I know you want what's best for the country and that unites you and I.

I simply have had enough of the fiscal liberals that have taken over the Republican party. They've plunged this country in to trillions of dollars of needless debt. While we borrow money from the Chinese, our "friends" the Iraqi's have a $79 billion dollar surplus. It's foolish.

Instead of pre-emptively striking countries that have NOT provoked us(Saddam Hussein hated Bin laden and qaeda), our resources would have been much better spent on finding alternative fuels, and securing our borders.

The party of Lincoln now believes that tapping my phone without a warrant is above board. Forget that quaint document, the Constitution and all my pertaining rights under the law. The Republican party of the last 8 years has also decided that torturing enemy captives is acceptable.

There comes a point when a party simply gets too far off base and a message has to be sent. I've chosen to not blindly support a party who's left it's true north and take a stand on principle.

I'm not condeming or criticizing anyone for not agreeing with me. I just retain the right to vote my principles until someone gets our message.

Really? you think that your phone can just be tapped for no reason at all?

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Really? you think that your phone can just be tapped for no reason at all?

I didn't say that Baron. It's my understanding that the Bush version of FISA can now tap any phone call solely because I'm receiving it from "a person reasonably believed to be located outside the United States." No mention of supposed terrorists or terrorists watch lists as it was previously. This is all at the discretion of the attorney general and the Director of National Intelligence with the secret court doing nothing but overseeing the methods.

So, if my friend from Ecuador calls, the federal government needs no other reason to eavesdrop on my conversation. Right or wrong?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

I didn't say that Baron. It's my understanding that the Bush version of FISA can now tap any phone call solely because I'm receiving it from "a person reasonably believed to be located outside the United States." No mention of supposed terrorists or terrorists watch lists as it was previously.

So, if my friend from Ecuador calls, the federal government needs no other reason to eavesdrop on my conversation. Right or wrong?

Not sure if Ecuador is on the list but that seems to be close. As long as the call originates outside the US. If you make the call they can't.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Not sure if Ecuador is on the list but that seems to be close. As long as the call originates outside the US. If you make the call they can't.

Ok, now I'll defer to you since you're the lawyer, but as I understand it, that is in complete contradiction to my 4th amendment right. What say ye?

Unless it's been amended our 4th amendment right still says:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

[tstew]

Originally Posted by tstew

Ferd, but I know alot of Americans that think like you do and whose standards match yours, and if we all just remain in our partisan sandboxes and not make our vote match the policies we actually want to see...we are all losers.

I don't believe that McCain feels like he has to do what the majority want him to do about immigration and other issues because he knows that 90% of the people on this forum do have a Republican or bust mentality...so what's the point of working for it.

Let me just add how the inevitable scene of conservative leaders and radio hosts jumping on the McCain bandwagon after speaking out against his brand of ideaology illustrates the nature of partisanship. You end up having to support someone inspite of your convictions without them having to do much to line up to those convictions.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

Ok, now I'll defer to you since you're the lawyer, but as I understand it, that is in complete contradiction to my 4th amendment right. What say ye?

Unless it's been amended our 4th amendment right still says:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

If you were a strict Constitutionalist wouldn't you say that everything in the 4th amendment were physical items?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by tstew

Let me just add how the inevitable scene of conservative leaders and radio hosts jumping on the McCain bandwagon after speaking out against his brand of ideaology illustrates the nature of partisanship. You end up having to support someone inspite of your convictions without them having to do much to line up to those convictions.

I think that things evolve and cycles occur.

It is recorded that Palin has taken some tough stands, even against her own party, to oust corruption. Could we vote this ticket and hope this country does evolve into better things?

I don't see the big players on Obama's ticket having the same resume.

After all, not only in our churches, but across the country people are looking to God. I have hopes in this. It can only spill out into the Government.

We can't forget that this world is about the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It's His world and nothing is going unnoticed by Him.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

If you were a strict Constitutionalist wouldn't you say that everything in the 4th amendment were physical items?

No way! By doing so, I would then be eliminating my 4th amendment rights on modern day technological issues that aren't physical. That would greatly erode my intended 4th amendment rights.

The authors intent is unmistakably clear. It protects all of my "things" from not being clearly described in a warrant and subsequently seized right?