If you are a political moderate, or even Liberal, the answer is "yes". Liberals in Pensylvania voted for Casey in the general election for Senate, overlooking his uncompromising Pro-Life stance.

If, however, you are an fundamentalist Christian the answer is, "No! Never!"

It is absolutely impossible for a Fundamentalist Christian to vote for a Pro-Choice candidate. Now or ever. And John McCain knows he has that vote locked up. Solid. He can do as he wishes, just as George W. Bush has done, and can still count on 100% of that vote, 100% of the time.

Look for the "Obama is an abortionist" ads to make the Christian Circuit about Labor Day to lock them in. That is all it will take.

wallus, on the first page of this thread wrote:

"My conservative parents both recognize Bush's crowd as the inept and corrupt opportunists they are, yet nobody ever confuses them with "liberals".”

However, those "Conservatives" Parents are still 100% guaranteed to vote for a third Bush term in the person of John McCain.

This is a conservative pattern: Vote in the most corrupt, incompetent, dishonest candidates, solely because they like what they hear. Then, when the inevitable disasters occur, they declare "He was no Conservative!" and then absolve themselves of any accountability. From there Conservatives move on to the next "Feel-good" candidate who makes promises that no one believes, but every Conservative votes for.

We are seeing that right now. John McCain's "Vision for 2013" speech contained absolutely zero specifics as to how he would accomplish even one of his items. However there is not one single Conservative in this country who did not believe Senator's McCain's promises. And every single one of them will vote for Saint John, because of those promises.

Sometime around 2015, toward the end of President McCain's second term (at about the same time our "Liberal Media" will be asking, "How were we so fooled, again?"), these same Conservatives will, of course, declare, "John McCain is not Conservative!" And declare their everlasting disillusionment. Of course someone from the next generation of the Bush Family will be eligible to run for president about then, se the Bush cycle will continue, unabated.

I guess this means it's time for the Federal Justice Department to extend it's "voter fraud prevention" campaign beyond the African American community and start purging the voter rolls of Arab-Americans as well.

We can expect the Conservative smear machine to come out in full force. Why does Scott "Hate America"?

My take is that neoConservatives, knowing that the **** will hit the fan rather loudly after eight years of George W. Bush, want a Democratic President to be there to take the blame when it all collapses, poised for a Republican to ride in as savior in 2012.

In case Mr. Greenwald hasn't noticed...

While he is pointing out the obsession of the media with unimportant stories, while ignoring items such as a war in Iraq that is costing $3 billion a week, and a candidate, Senator McCain, who has promised to "Stay the [Bush[ Course" there is elected.

On this same site, the Salon writers are climbing all over Hillary Clinton, parsing her every word to make sure that her reference to Robert F. Kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign was "pure enough" to pass their tests.

How about those same writers "Fact Checking" John McCain's comments with at least as much vigor? Or would holding John McCain as accountable as they do Hillary Clinton subject them to the displeasure of the Conservative media?

Could "Saint John" survive the microscopic examination that Hillary Clinton endures EVERY day for even ONE day?

Likely not. Nowever we will never know because we know he will never have to... because he's "The Guy all the press wants to have a barecue with".

I still say this is not as important as John McCain running for Bush's third term, with the active assistance of the "Free Pass" Media.

Is anyone, anywhere, holding John McCain to this sort of standard? Could "Saint John" experience this sort of compaign microscope? Of course not. And the Conservative media would see to it that he never will, with "Liberal Media is out to get Senator McCain" screams. After which our spineless media would back off Senator McCain so fast their would trip over they laptops as they rushed for the door.

When I see our reporters take on John McCain FIRST, THEN I will beleive this is anything other than the usual media witchhunt that they have persued against Hillary Clinton at every opportunity they have ever had.

We have a president who is running a war costing $300 million a day.

This same president has trashed the constitution.

The US is in a recession.

Gasoline is past $4 per gallon, and heading straight up.

The US is borrowing more than $150 billion a year from the Chinese central bank to stay afloat. Plus another $300 billion or so from the rest of the world.

Housing prices are dropping at a rate not seen since the Great Depression.

And our media is tying itself in knots on whether or not Hllary Clinton "properly" cited the campaign of Robert F. Kennedy in an interview?

This is the dumbest "discussion" since everyone was in an uproar about what sort of tip was left for a waitress.

Can't our media actually write about something important, for a change?

So, the Republican party is going to run a smear campaign against Barak obama, filled with lies, innuendo, personal invective and appeals to emotion. all the while trying to get Americans to ignore issues and reality and, instead focus on made up issues and pledges that everyone knows will never be kept ("Weekly Question Time for the President in front of Congress"? Never happen!).

What else is new? Is the Pope really Catholic? Do bears really *** in the woods? Is George w. Bush going to start another war, with Iran, before he leaves office?

If Republicans did not depend on pure hate and smears to get elected, they would not elect anyone at all.