Posted on 09/17/2014 4:36:52 PM PDT by Kansas58
A very disturbing number of Freepers are openly advocating, on Free Republic threads, for the defeat of Senator Pat Roberts and other good Conservative Republicans. Greg Orman, in Kansas, is a pro abortion, anti gun, tax and spend Liberal Democrat who has given tens of thousands of dollars to Obama and Pelosi and the Democrat Party and Harry Reid. I am called an "idiot" for supporting Roberts. However, I think that those on Free Republic who support Harry Reid and Greg Orman should be ZOTTED, kicked off the site. I have had enough of there hate filled, vindictive, misguided trash.
That FReeper had zero chance of winning the presidency. Was he even on the ballot in every state?
If you knowingly back a candidate that supports abortion you guarentee that once elected, that pols support of abortion will result in dead babies. No way around that. If you back a pol that is pro life, you will potentially save babies lives. Because that pol will not side with the pro aborts.
You can’t compartmentalize this one. No one can. Actions over this issue are life and death and the people siding with the pro abort pols share responsibility in those deaths since their actions led directly to them. When a drunk driver slams into a car and hills a pregnant mother and child, people have been prosecuted for the crime that provided the alcohol because they shared responsibility.
Same here. Because by definition, there is life or there is not. Nothing between. If your voting contributes to ‘not’ then it is what it is.
No matter how pathetic, p-wipped, stupid, eco-oriented and big business stooges they are I always vote for the Republican candidates. The Dem is too much worse
Really? If he got enough votes he would have won. He didn’t get any because situational ethicists gambled on a RINO instead and willingly voted OTC...other than conservative. If people vote for someone in quantity, they win. No guarentees. There never are. Deal with it.
Since this line of discussion began with my saying I would support the republicans (excepting Cochran which is a special case, and according to the Miss. Supreme Court not even decided yet), I said that Scott Brown would be an additional special case. That is because I’ve heard he is pro-abortion. If that is so, I said I’d not support him...or any pro-abortion republican.
Actually, I don’t know of many pro-abortion republicans. They tend to be pro life.
For me that’s good because that is my line in the sand. However, if someone crosses that line, then they don’t get my support, nor the support of many conservatives like me who have life as their number one issue.
And it should be. Any politician who will condone murder will backstab you on anything else. They’ve already admitted that murder doesn’t bother them.
Murder is not a matter of pragmatism. It’s a matter of evil.
You’re right. If I vote for someone who is for abortion, it will probably result in dead babies. I don’t want to vote for dead babies, but that’s not the choice I’m given. I’ll try once again to explain it.
I’m a conservative so I’ll either not vote or vote for the most conservative candidate who has a realistic chance of winning in the general election. Compare me to a Democrat voter who loyally votes for the Democrat no matter what. Neither of us will cross party lines.
We come to the general election, and I follow your advice. I refuse to vote because my candidate isn’t pro-life. The candidate might even support restrictions on abortion, but I refuse to vote on the grounds that they aren’t 100% pro-life. Result? The Democrat voter puts their abortion-embracing, government funding, candidate over the top, and more babies are murdered.
As a conservative, you can only hurt our cause by sitting out elections. In regards to abortion, you’re effectively sacrificing babies in the here and now for an ideal. You can’t save all the babies, so you refuse to act to save some of them. Then you dare say I’m responsible for murdering some them when I manage to save some of them. You’ve got it completely backwards.
Wow.
You always have a choice. Maybe you ought to take a look at your own tagline.
Some posts back, you asked if Romney would be destroying the military. Actually, yes, he would. Just the other day I saw a letter he wrote to some queer group, saying that he would work hard to get them equality so they could serve openly in the armed services.
I heard Limbaugh say that queer officers are now raping our soldiers. So, yeah, that would be happening under Romney, too.
With respect, as long as you're dreaming, would you like a pony?
“” Romney in no way is as bad as Obama”
Buzzz, wrong.”
I see. This s a great illustration if the lack of any sort of critical thinking and fatalism on the part of you Democrat enablers.
All it means is you don’t really pay attention to the leftist and Democrats and dont take what they are doing seriously.
I’m not sure, to be honest, if you realize just how incredibly ridiculous you sound. I really want to believe that someone pays you to say this stuff. I do. Because the alternative is that you willingly say this stuff and worse, that you think it passes for conservative thought, ideals and values.
OK. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. You say you are not a paid plant? So be it. You have perhaps one of the most deluded intellects I have encountered in 20 years of online debate. I just don’t know what else to say. you re so divorced from logical progression, action/consequence and observational reasoning, there is nothing more to say. You have ducked, avoided, repeated the same nonsense time and again and like the recent meme about the pigeon kicking over the chess pieces, crapping on the board and declaring victory, there is no longer a point in playing this game with you.
Best of luck supporting whatever leftist the GOP offers up and please, when you lose yet another election for the right in 16, have the decency to dig this thread up and admit your mistakes.
Um, right.
Back in ‘12 I remember most Freepers opposing Romney, but many saying that they would hold their noses to vote for him as the nominee. I don’t remember any who supported him in the primary (and there weren’t many) doing so on ideological grounds; the arguments (iirc) were based on electability.
I DO remember lots of fights between Freepers over their preferred Conservative candidate, and which one was the true Conservative deserving of support. If thats the work of syncophants, I’d really like to know who the spoiler candidates were who run by the GOPe to split Conservatives and give Romney the nomination. Gingrich? Santorum? Herman Cain?
The truth is that we Conservatives keep shooting ourselves in the feet by not getting to a common candidate early in the primaries. Until we understand that, instead of blaming the nomination of a Romney or a McCain on shadowy GOPe operatives who we just know are lurking out there trying to disrupt us, we’re going to end up with nominees we really don’t like, but most assuredly deserve.
Sycophants kept the pot boiling. Go back and reread some of those threads. The result was chaos. They are doing the same routine 2 years ahead of schedule. Verbatim.
Yes. Abortion is evil. Do you have a plan to ban it? Can your plan work in the here and now?
I think Democrats are largely successful because they fight as a team for every little bit they can get. If they can’t get it all, they settle for a little now and come back for more later.
If you want to eliminate abortion, what political strategy is most likely going to work? First, you have to win elections. That should go without saying but seems impossible for some here to grasp. Do you try to pass a total ban? That would almost certainly fail, but as a symbolic gesture, it seems more important to some than actually reducing abortions.
No. The best approach is one that keeps nibbling away at abortion until there’s almost nothing left. Then you might even get your shot at a real ban. In the meantime, real lives will be saved.
That’s what I’m saying about general elections. You can’t have what you want right now, but don’t walk away! Take the best you can get now and fight again tomorrow. In no way am I advocating surrender. So we lost this round to the RINOs. Don’t make it even worse by not voting! That helps ensure something even worse than a RINO wins.
You would seriously choose to not save a baby today because you can’t save all the babies?
I would refuse to put my support behind anyone who backs baby murder. Period.
You may have a point there about Romney and the military, but I’m not trying to defend Romney. I’m only trying to prove he’s not exactly the same as Obama. That’s what another poster claimed. Exactly means identical in all respects. It’s an exaggerated claim.
Dude. If Romney had been “electable”, he WOULD HAVE BEEN ELECTED!
End of story. He wasn’t...and he wasn’t.
CitizenUSA, I have already told you the plan. I will not support those politicians who support abortion. How exactly is it reasonable to support a republican who supports abortion if abortion is what I oppose?
Do I end talk of amnesty by supporting politicians who support amnesty? Nope, for that would be a contradiction.
Do I balance the budget by supporting politicians who support uncontrolled spending?
We cannot let our desire to win elections blind us to reality. If our team wins against our enemy who supports abortion, but our team also supports abortion, then how exactly has that helped the cause? It hasn’t.
Just for the record, I also write, donate, and speak publically in support of Life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.