This is my response to the Kos Koolaid thread by the troll named "Pae1"

1.
     a) "Pae1" is a troll.  Joined the day he posted this, posted only this, posted no follow-up, did not announce himself in "new users" forum (indicating he's not serious about being here).
     b) as a troll, his comment was meant to roil, not to discuss, and it carries no more weight than your typical liberal troll "drive-by" comment.
     c) the whole opening post of this is preposterous on its face -- not really worthy of direct response.

2. Nonetheless, he states a point of view that is far more widespread than my point of view that McCain MUST not be voted for.  A point of view espoused by all Republicans(whatever that means), most people who call themselves "conservative", and every ostensible "Conservative Republican" with a voice in the television and print media.  So, obviously, this point of view must be addressed.

3. It is time -- far past time, really -- to recognize that there is no longer any such thing as a "Conservative Republican".  Oh, to be sure, there are a small minority of conservatives in politics, and they all have an "R" before their names; but this is merely an artifact of the two-party system.  They MUST be "Republicans" because there is no "Conservative" party; they have no other choice.
     The Republican party, and the term "Republican", has become meaningless.  Many accuse Democrats of being driven only by a desire for power.  I think this accusation would be more accurately directed at the Republican party.  The Democrats, in conjunction with desire for power, actually stand FOR something.  They stand for things that I find abhorrent, but they stand for, and against, SOMETHING.  Can the same be said of the Republican Party?

4. One CANNOT vote for John McCain and claim to be a "conservative", any more than one can vote for Barrack Obama and claim to be a "conservative".  John McCain is opposed to conservative principles, and a vote for John McCain is antithetical to standing up for those conservative principles.  One may feel that voting for John McCain is best for this country; however, it is an ABSOLUTE, and INCONTROVERTIBLE, ABANDONMENT of conservative principles.  If one votes in a way that is best for the country, but which does not represent any conservative principle  -- said vote is not a "conservative" vote.  Furthermore, such a vote is an admission that conservative principles are not best for this country.  If one does not stand upon conservative principles, and vote based upon those principles -- even if it means LOSING -- how can one be considered "conservative"?

5. LOSING.  YES, LOSING ......LOSING this election ....potentially LOSING this country ......LOSING may be exactly what is required to remain "conservative" -- And I will do it proudly.  I will LOSE today as a conservative.  If this country becomes a communist despotism, I will be sent to the Gulag as a conservative.  And, if necessary, in the future feared by those who vote for John McCain to prevent a Clinton Presidency -- I will die as a conservative.  
     Mock this as childish hyperbole if you will.  At the same time, mock Madison, mock Jefferson, mock Hamilton, mock Franklin, mock PATRICK HENRY.
     Mock even that as childich hyperbole if you will.  Explain how times are not the same.  How the world is not the same.  How the danger is not the same. ..................
Oh, and .....if the danger is not the same ...............
........................................
........................................
........................................
..............................................Why the f**k are you so afraid of a Democrat Presidency under Clinton or Obama, that you are foaming at the mouth to vote for ANOTHER DEMOCRAT -- John McCain.

6. To those who say, "I'll vote for McCain because he's strong on the War on Terror" I can only suggest re-thinking the truth of this statement.

     a) John McCain will eliminate any ability we have to effectively interrogate captives

     b) John McCain will grant Constitutional Rights not only to non-citizens, but also to ENEMIES of the United States.  Providing Prisoners of War with access to U.S. criminal courts with all of the rights and protections afforded to U.S. citizens is not only unwise.... it is not only detrimental to success in the War on Terror .... it is also TREASON.
     
     c)
          i) John McCain will give U.S. citizenship to illegal aliens.  Forgetting all else that is wrong with this course of action, would it surprise you to learn that not every last illegal alien is Mexican?  Would it surprise you to learn that many illegal aliens are from middle-eastern Islamic nations?  Would it surprise you to learn that there are currently illegal immigrants in this country who are sympathetic to Islamic terror?  Who financially or otherwise support Islamic terror?  Who are, in fact, terrorists -- currently planning domestic terror attacks?
Well, ................
..........................
...........................
.......................SURPRISE!
            ii) Why does Al Qaeda insist on fighting & killing when they could simply come here, gain citizenship, and VOTE for a Global Islamic Caliphate?  I think we should have an outreach program to radical Islamic terrorists -- a sort of information clearinghouse -- to make sure that they all know that fighting is unnecessary; they can ALL come here, be GUARANTEED citizenship, and VOTE theire will upon us.  Clearly, the entire War on Terror could be ended tomorrow if we would only INFORM our ENEMIES of their RIGHTS to come, become citizens, and VOTE.

     d) John McCain will continue the Bush policy of totally open borders.  In what way do open borders help to protect this country from Terrorism? Can you document ANY other war or conflict in human history in which protection of national borders was not important?  Where it was not, in point of fact, the ultimate goal of at least one side in the conflict?  John McCain is "strong" on the War on Terror? NOBODY who advocates wide-open borders is "strong" on war.  ANYBODY who actually advocates wide-open borders cannot reasonably considered to even be SERIOUS about war or defense.  If I'm wrong, please explain how open borders increases security or advances the War on Terror.


7. This point will, of course, be discounted as childish hyperbole; just as (on a different forum)  my questioning how far McCain voters will take the concept of voting for the "lesser of two evils" (i.e., to the point of choosing between Hitler and Stalin).

So, if anyone here is incapable of grasping hypotheticals, or of thinking abstractly, PLEASE STOP READING NOW.
Ahem, .... ok, here goes:

      In the most extreme and abstract terms, I equate voting for McCain to voting for Hitler and to standing silently by as Jewish or other "undesireable" neighbors are rounded up.  Please, bear with me here.

     In NAZI Germany, the populace of otherwise decent volk, were cowed into submission, and into accepting things that they, prior to NAZI enslavement, would never have allowed or accepted.  They all looked the other way.  To the point that nearly every child in America, when told of what happened in NAZI Germany, first questions how everybody could have gone along with this?  Why did good people in Germany let this happen?  Even when an adult explains that by the time it was happening, it was already too late to stop it; the child inevitably asks, "Well, why didn't they stop it? Why didn't they fight?"

    You and I know that Germans didn't fight for three reasons:
         a) They had been brainwashed by NAZI propoganda; or
         b) They knew that if they stood up against what was happening, they would be killed, or sent to a camp -- and so did nothing; OR,
         c) They DID stand up against it.  They DID fight.  And they were imprisoned or killed.

Keep following me, I am actually going somewhere with this.

     The question then becomes one you must ask yourself.  Which of the above categories would you have fallen into? Let's ignore the first category -- assuming that everyone here would have been immune to the propoganda.  The choice is then between: (a) living, and (b) dying.
     Many people would like to believe that they would have made a principled stand -- even if it meant death or imprisonment.  But no one knows the answer until they are actually placed in such a situation.  Many or most people would like to believe that they would have DONE something; that they would have fought; that they would have opposed NAZIism no matter what the cost; that they would always adamantly oppose EVIL in favor of GOOD; that they would fight for human decency and oppose human barbarity and monstrosity, even unto death.  Of course, we all know that among people who believe that they would do this; probably 95% - 99% wouldn't.  If your neighbor were about to be shot by the Gestapo, would you shoot them?  Would you fight them, even if it meant you might be killed?
     In short, could you honestly say, "Give me Liberty or Give me Death!" and MEAN it?


So, what does this have to do with John McCain?  Two things:
     a) If you could honestly stand on principle in the face of death; it makes standing on principle in the upcoming election pretty easy.  Conversely, if you would NOT stand on principle, even in the face of losing one Presidential Election; it's pretty clear which kind of 1930's & 1940's German you would have been.
    b) The argument FOR McCain is only that Hillary Clinton as President would be sooo horrible.  As all here know, I too think that Hillary Clinton would be horrible.  It's conceivable that she could be horrible beyond measure and drive this nation into despotic communism.  Bad.  Very, very bad. So the question becomes this: "Would she be so bad that it would put your very life in jeopardy?".  
          i) If so, then the question of whether you can stand on principle in the face of potential death becomes literally relevant.
          ii) If not, then McCain Supporters abandon principle LONG before it becomes a matter of life and death.  They abandon principle literally at the drop of a hat, or the drop of an election, or the drop of a poll.
THAT'S the point. That one there.

Would Hillary be so bad that it would put your very life in jeopardy?  If not, then McCain Supporters abandon principle LONG before it becomes a matter of life and death.  They abandon principle literally at the drop of a hat, or the drop of an election, or the drop of a poll.



"Victory at all costs!" shout the McCain SUPPORTERS.  Victory over what?  Victory by whom?

Here here! I second and third and fourth it all!

When you're willing to win at any cost, the cost will eventually become too great.