Attorney General resigns

I don't think we depart on that. I think we depart on what we do when we have no new choices. There is not, at this time, any viable third party choice. And I don't think just sitting on the side lines is acceptable since there is more than one issue at stake.

If the only issue were spending, then let's all stay home. They wll all spend like drunken sailors. But there are more issues that we must considert

 

On that I agree. What happens when a Giuliani (pro abortion) or a Romney (deceives about abortion) is the nominee, and run against a Clinton (or any Demcorat), which is quite possible.

Now we have moved from the realm of spending and other worldy issues to the very crux of morality. How would a Christian in good conscience be able to vote for either? I consider the fact that two leaders for the Republican nomination are pro choice as another sign of the demise of the Republicans.

There may not at this time be a viable third party. However, the question will still remain, who will a Christian cast a vote for in Novemeber 2008 given the above choices?

 

The real reason Gonzales resigned...
http://www.truthdig.com/images/eartothegrounduploads/lkgonzo_resigns500.jpg

 

I suspect many Republicans, that are of the religious right are being conditioned as we speak to not vote, and that will probably insure a Democrat victory. Many on this very board are bowing out of this struggle, in choosing not to vote, or in voting third party. Either choice will help the Dems., and harm the GOP.

 

If all of the people who bemoan that there is not a viable party other than the Democrat and Republican Parties would vote for another party, then there would be a viable party other than the Democrat and Republican Parties.

 

Your reasoning is flawed. You assume that the default position of most everyone on this board is to vote Republican. That is simply not the case.

 

If the democrats win the WH they won't have to give up warrantless searches, domestic spying, extraordinary rendition and torture or restore habeas corpus and due process just because Gonzales resigned will they?

 

You don't know that Romney is deceiving about abortion. He may well have changed his position. As I pointed out, Kennedy did and no one accuses him of deceiving. I honestly don't know what his position is.

Yes a sign of the demise of the Republicans. But let's view it this way. Let's assume the Repub and the Dem are both prochoice to at least some degree and there is no viable third party. There is still a difference on some other issues. I am not sure the "take my ball and go home" is hte best way. Bush didn't do enough about abortion. But thanks to those who didn't vote for Baldwin, we have two apparently conservative Supreme Court justicies

Remember the lesson sof 92. Perot, a third party, took enough vote from Bush to give us Clinton. Who knows what Bush would have done, but the third party candidate means that Clinton got elected with a majority of people voting against him. (Strangely I don't hear Hillary or John Kery or Gore complaining aobut that electorla college occasion).

[quoteThere may not at this time be a viable third party. However, the question will still remain, who will a Christian cast a vote for in Novemeber 2008 given the above choices?[/quote]Since we are not given the above choices yet, I don't have ot decide. Not sure what I would do. But I am not a single issue voter. If we are going to have abortion (which I detest as much if not much more than you do I imagine), I am going to consider other things as well.

 

If there were another viable party, I would certainly consider voting for them. but there's not. That's the problem Ken. We live in reality, not in the dreamworld.

 

The problem with Giuliani isn't that he doesn't do enough about abortion; it's that he is pro-choice. Bush isn't pro-choice; he's just not overly pro-life.

I'm an odd duck, though. As much as I don't want Hillary to be president, I'd much rather have her than Giuliani, if for no other reason than the effect it would have on the GOP. If Guiliani wins, it will be proof that social concerns can be ignored.

 

I'd rather the GOP be destroyed than to have it fall into the hands of RINOs.

IMO, the only way for a third party to emerge is to destroy one of the big two. The Democrats are alive and well because they generally enforce their political orthodoxy. Republicans stand for whatever is needed to get elected in their respective districts (cf. Arlen Specter, Arnold the Governator, Giuliani, etc.).

 

The reality is that there are minor party and independent candidates. And, believe me, I have availed myself of the opportunity to vote for them often during my voting career and I plan on continuing to do so.

Not that it will matter in Arkansas in 2008, which Senator Clinton will carrry comfortably.

 

That is only conjecture. It has not been proven. I have read a strong case made for the Perot candidacy to have hurt Bush's vote only marginally, certainly nowhere near enough to have overcome his Electoral College deficit to Clinton.

I think that argument is one that some people make to avoid admitting that the GOP ran a very poor candidate for president in 1992 in the form of a another failed Bush presidency.

 

Yes, but as I have poitned out, they have not been able to gain enough viability to become a serious candidate and that troubles me, but it is not an easy fix.

The studies I read (years ago) were that Perot took from Bush not Clinton. In a two party race, Bush (for better or worse) would have won. I am no fan of Bush I, but I was merely commenting on my recollection of the election.

I am not trying to avoid that. I think Bush I was bad Bush II is bad. Clinton was extremely bad but happened to catch the economic cycle in the right place as well as the Republican revelationof 94 that helped him out tremendously.

In the end, we will never know exactly what would have happened. The hypotheticals are more fun (and less damaging) than the reality.

 

While agree with your conclusion, a hillary victory would be disastrous.

 

Gonzales' resignation may be the worst thing that could happen to democrats.

They either have to find a new distraction to keep people from realizing how ineffective they are and how little they have accomplished or they will actually have to govern.

I believe they will put forth a major effort to find a new distraction.:thumbs:

 

Now the top 3 jobs at Justice are vacant. Wheels coming off a lame duck regime?