<p>^^^ And I disagree with his soft on terrorism stance. He wants to chase bin laden to the gates of Hell and then read him his Miranda rights.</p>
<p>Well, without putting too fine a point on it - both of those issues (posts 160 & 161) could be viewed as examples of how McCain believes that America should take the high road & act honorably & compassionately to our enemies as well as our immigrants.</p>
<p>BTW, McCain’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform plan involved quite a few hoops for immigrants - paying fines, paying back taxes, returning to their home country to apply for a green card, etc. It wasn’t amnesty & it was a “step” in the right direction. I give him credit for at least trying to address the problem (especially so close to a campaign!), and that was a lot closer to a solution than what we have now (de facto amnesty since all the illegals are still here w/ no change in status!). And I’m pretty sure he’s gotten the message about border security! haha!</p>
<p>“Well, without putting too fine a point on it - both of those issues (posts 160 & 161) could be viewed as examples of how McCain believes that America should take the high road & act honorably & compassionately to our enemies as well as our immigrants”</p>
<p>But NEITHER is an example of partisanship. Please note the difference and also note that FF and I have said that we will likely vote for McCain. Thank you.</p>
<p>As far as his immigration plan, it was amnesty and my opinion is that everything was wrong about that plan. But that is disagreement, not partisanship.</p>
<p>"both of those issues (posts 160 & 161) could be viewed as examples of how McCain believes that America should take the high road & act honorably & compassionately to our enemies "</p>
<p>How many of our citizens are you or McCain (or both of the Dems) willing to let die to be on that high road?</p>
<p>zm - ah yes, I agree. Not partisanship. Please disregard any comments by me regarding partisanship & McCain - obviously not directed at you (more toward Hannity, Rush, & other partisans - on both sides!).</p>
<p>ff - wow! What a question! Are “fighting terrorism” & “upholding American ideals” mutually exclusive?</p>
<p>“ff - wow! What a question! Are “fighting terrorism” & “upholding American ideals” mutually exclusive?”</p>
<p>The horrible truth is that sometimes they might be and it’s intellectually dishonest to not answer that question. It’s abundantly clear that our enemies are no gentlemen and are certainly not interested in conducting themselves according to the tradition of the battlefield. The failure to actually come out and say “I hope that my adherence to the principles that I hold dear never leads to that choice, but I believe in the grand scheme of things that those principles should prevail” makes it clear to me that many people who rail against answering that question know that it is a choice foisted upon a principled people by an immoral group of sub-humans, rather than one sought for some craven purpose. (I’m shocked, SHOCKED! that those misunderstood followers of the Religion of Peace might, you know, choose to kill innocent people when all we want to do is talk to them and understand them.)</p>
<p>In response to the first post:</p>
<p>The Boston Globe is ultra liberal and is owned by the New York Times.</p>
<p>The Boston Herald is considered more conservative, but it really isn’t. In 2006 it endorsed Nikki Tsongas (A liberal who is THE definition of a political hack) over Jim Ogonowski, a man who served his country and whose brother was killed on 9/11.</p>
<p>They can’t be that conservative if they are endorsing McCain.</p>
<p>“wow! What a question! Are “fighting terrorism” & “upholding American ideals” mutually exclusive?”</p>
<p>I question that American ideals are compromised by taking a few terrorist leaders and making them uncomfortable in the same manner that we make our own pilots and special forces to go through when the intent of this interrogation is to save innocent lives. To me, we would be violating our American principles of valuing human life by not doing this.</p>
<p>I think JM has a fighting chance to win. I like his reasonable stand on immigration too. All the wacko conservatives can just hold their noses and vote for him.</p>
<p>They may just stay home and not vote, or find a protest 3rd party candidate. I know several who will never vote for McCain, in fact every Republican that I know. He just doesn’t represent them, and they don’t want to feel responsible for 4 years of his politics. I don’t think that they are wackos, just as Democrats who really want Obama over Clinton are not wackos, they just feel strongly.</p>
<p>From Post 166 by Zoosermom .a choice foisted upon a principled people by an immoral group of sub-humans,</p>
<p>The description of a people as sub-humans was a term used by the Nazis to describe the Jews. Once the Nazis had declared the Jews sub-human the Nazis used the phony sub-human status of the Jews to justify the killing of over 6,000,000 of them.</p>
<p>It is very disturbing to read that people still think this way</p>
<p>"The description of a people as “sub-humans” was a term used by the Nazis to describe the Jews. Once the Nazis had declared the Jews “sub-human” the Nazis used the phony “sub-human” status of the Jews to justify the killing of over 6,000,000 of them.</p>
<p>It is very disturbing to read that people still think this way"</p>
<p>Hilarious that a hater like you should be “disturbed” by anything. But, hey, at least you called me a Nazi directly and in public view, instead of in PM.</p>
<p>Feel free to be disturbed. The creatures who decimated MY CITY and killed people that I KNEW and disrupted MY WAY OF LIFE on a daily basis were not human, so you can just, well, you figure it out.</p>
<p>“I think JM has a fighting chance to win. I like his reasonable stand on immigration too. All the wacko conservatives can just hold their noses and vote for him.”</p>
<p>How nice of you to call me names Barrons. It is utterly shameful that principled disagreement is not allowed here.</p>
<p>I do agree that the rhetoric needs to come down a notch…it is very easy to call people names thinking you are anonymous, but are you really? Do you know maybe you are actually offending your best friend.</p>
<p>Quick story…DS was on one night and responding to someone about Obama (DS is voting for JM), as this is going back and forth I jokingly said to him, wouldn’t it be funny if that is your GF…you got it, IT WAS HIS GF…he never knew her screen name and she didn’t know his, until the exact same time (we laugh about it now)…she said when she saw the name it made her think of him, but never correlated that it could be…lesson learned be careful, you might be insulting someone you love!</p>
<p>“lesson learned be careful, you might be insulting someone you love!”</p>
<p>Good point. (Are you Bullet or Pima, I never can tell.) But in a civilized society, is it ever really acceptable to call someone, even someone you DON’T love, a Nazi? Happens here a lot. I would be curious with regard to other republicans/conservatives: how much hate do you get in PM?</p>
<p>I am Pima. I think we confuse the crap out of people…it looks like we are on 18 hrs a day, but I chime in back and forth while I work (Realtor)…very rarely am I on at night (busy being MOM and getting ready for the next day), that is when he chimes in.</p>
<p>Easiest way to tell if it is Bullet he likes to joke alot, even in serious conversations…I am more here is the fact, period, dot.</p>
<p>We have received only 1 PM and it was the most hateful thing in my entire life…he knows who he is, and we never reported him to the moderators, just figured he needs more help than any moderator could do by banning them. </p>
<p>They don’t know us or our life, if it makes them happy, read the email and chuck it…don’t get down to their level by responding. If they think that they proved they were right because you didn’t answer, so be it, it just proves that by not answering you are more mature</p>
<p>"We have received only 1 PM and it was the most hateful thing in my entire life…he knows who he is, and we never reported him to the moderators, just figured he needs more help than any moderator could do by banning them. "</p>
<p>Thanks Pima. I appreciate the supportive words. I get some hideous ones by virtue of my audacity at being conservative. That makes my kids fair game too. To be fair, though, I’ve also made some lovely, helpful, kind friends.</p>
<p>I started a thread how has the CC changed your life. I never expected so many responses of how people have been affected. Of course as usual by page 4 we went off topic :D</p>
<p>Zooersmom said in post 172 …at least you called me a Nazi directly and in public view,</p>
<p>Lets set the record straight I did not call you a Nazi …it is a false statement on your part to say I did. </p>
<p>As for you calling me a hater that is also a false statement on your part.</p>
<p>Your post(s) stand TommyBill, there is nothing for you to say that you haven’t already. People can draw their own conclusions about your posting style. Actually, they already have and you know what those conclusions were.</p>