Critical: Deposing Obama without Supporting Romney

The Red Side of Life Conservative Musings from New York ^ | 4/27/12 | RedInNewYork

[jmstein7]

Obama is a dictator who must be deposed, not merely voted out of office. He represents – no, he is – an evil that we have not seen in modern American history. For those of us who had Romney shoved down our throats by the GOP-e (GOP Elite), this election is still not the classic choice between the lesser of two evils – it is a choice between a moderate conciliator and an absolute evil.

The closest analog I can think of for a comparison to Obama, as contemporary Presidents go, is FDR – but in outcome only. Unlike Obama, FDR was merely an ignorant and stupid man. FDR was ignorant because he refused to acknowledge that his administration was fully infiltrated and run by now-confirmed Communists – Dean Acheson and Alger Hiss, by way of example – who took their marching orders from the Kremlin and not the White House. FDR was also a stupid man, as evinced by his mode of economic reasoning. For example, he notoriously stated that milk producers would make more money if the government would merely force them to charge higher prices. Stupid.

Obama, by contrast, has acted with full knowledge and intent of his insidious purpose. His “stupid” moments – such as his candid “hot mic” comments – have merely confirmed this. The most recent and dangerous example was his comments to Russian President Medvedev that he (Obama) would “have more flexibility” after his re-election (heaven forbid!).  Taken in context, Obama was reassuring the Russians that, if re-elected, he would give up, and away the secrets of, our missile shield – opening us up to a new threat of nuclear destruction from rogue nations, such as Iran, when they acquire the ability to deliver nuclear warheads to our mainland by remote delivery (missile). On the basis of this issue alone I have decided that I cannot sit on my hands in November – to do so would be sentence my children to certain death, in time. No, Obama has to go.

Unlike Romney, who merely has a propensity to sway with public opinion, Obama openly defies public opinion to enact his radical agenda – by any means. Obama has now abused and exceeded Constitutional executive powers by fiat – either by means of executive orders, agency decrees (rules), or machinations of the Justice Department via his radical co-conspirator, Eric Holder– to get what he wants. To leave him in power for four years as a lame duck President would not be merely foolish – it would be dangerous.

Romney, in contrast, merely annoys me by his regular conciliation and apparent lack of core values. That said, I would rather live in annoyance of Romney than in constant terror and fear of Obama, and what he might do next, if given the opportunity. He must be denied such opportunity. So, yes, I will cast my vote for Romney, but I will not do anything to actively support him or the elites who foisted him upon me. I will, instead, punish the GOP-e while working to depose Obama by other means, and to keep a President Romney in check.

Financially, I will not give a red cent to the RNC or the Romney campaign. On the National Level, I intend to seek out PACs, Super PACs, and 527s that share my values and whose aim it is to defeat Obama. Our money should flow to them, not to Romney or the RNC. That is the fiscal penalty for anointing Romney.

The second form of GOP-e payback is to oust their RINO (Republican In Name Only) enablers. This means, in a practical sense, doing so research to “hunt” down the RINOs who can be “primary’d” out in 2012. Dick Lugar and Orrin Hatch are already in trouble. Their fate, and others, can be sealed by immediately throwing your support (in any form) to FreedomWorks, a powerful group already dedicated to this very effort. On a local level, we can support Conservative House candidates in primaries against RINOs. In anticipation of Romney, I have already set up a small PAC (sponsored by my Law Firm) dedicated to this effort. You can check it out here. Of course, do give direct support to Conservative House and Senate candidates when you can, and do search out groups who are dedicated to the same. A more Conservative House and Senate will be an excellent check on Romney – he can’t sign RINO legislation if there isn’t any, after all.

So, in short, Obama must be voted out of office. Further, we must show up on Election Day en force to elect Conservative House and Senate members. And we can do it all and still send a strong message to, and punish, the GOP-e.

[Diogenesis]

Romney IS Obama.

Heck, Romney made ObamaCARE BEFORE the Tyrant.

[Logical me]

Heck, Romney made ObamaCARE BEFORE the Tyrant.

So? There is no doubt you prefer King Obama.

[dirtboy]

OK, let's see the case made over these objections about Romney:

1) The GOP-E in 2010, by their continual efforts to backstab Tea Party candidates that defeated RINOs in the primary, showed that to them, party unity only applies when the RINO wins.

2) Romney used a scorched-earth approach against other candidates in the GOP primary that makes it exceedingly difficult to reconcile after the primaries have been concluded.

3) Romney is a very bad candidate to woo independents, as he takes Obamacare, bailouts and Wall Street cronyism largely off the table as election issues against Obama, and he is simply not an appealing candidate to them in the general.

4) Romney is an even worse candidate for rallying the base, given his past liberal positions and his well-documented propensity for changing his views to suit the next election. How can conservatives believe a thing he says now, especially after the Etch-A-Sketch comment by one of his key advisors?

5) Romney's only advantage in the GOP primary was money to pound the political life out of his opponents. He will not have that advantage in the general. And he has already provided the Obama campaign and the DNC with an autumn's worth of sound bites to use against him.

6) Romney simply is not a likeable candidate and the only reason he appears to be running is to feed his own ego.

7) A case can also be made, given the fact that G.W. Bush didn't veto a spending bill sent to him by a GOP Congress, that a GOP Congress would not stand up to Romney's liberalism the way they have with Obama's.

That's a lot of strikes. For those demanding that skeptical conservatives fall in line, realize that the temptation is very strong to tell the GOP-E to stuff their calls for party unity where it don't shine, given what happened in 2010. That Romney and the GOP-E are the ones who largely created the divide we see today, and I have seen no sign that they are aware of their own culpability, the first step to bridging that divide - to the contrary, they seem driven to rub conservative's noses in the fact that Romney won. And that there is a strong perception that Romney is doomed to failure, and that efforts should instead be put into electing more conservatives for Congress and state and local races.

So the usual calls for party unity after the RINO wins just ain't gonna cut it this time. Running against Obama won't be enough, either. You have a very hard sell with Romney. The usual sales pitches from previous campaigns just won't cut it.

[jobim]

Did you watch GBTV’s show about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the Obama Admin? Are you saying that what has happened would continue the same under Romney?

[Keith in Iowa]

A vote for Willard as the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

[Yashcheritsiy]

You know, if every conservative who whined about how they don’t like Romney, but they “have” to vote for him to “stop Obama” would get together and unite behind an actual conservative third party candidate, there’d be a good shot at beating both Romney and Obama.

Conservatives make up a plurality in this country. There are a lot of disaffected independents who don’t like either party. There are conservative Democrats who are disaffected with their Party’s guy, and for whom Romney won’t be a big draw. That’s fertile ground for a credible third party run with a decent candidate.

The only thing keeping conservatives from having this option are the spineless, GOP-institutionalised folks who can’t see out of their little boxes.

[tcrlaf]

“unite behind an actual conservative third party candidate, there’d be a good shot at beating both Romney and Obama.”

Ummm... NO, THERE WOULDN’T. How many times do you have to be shown what history has taught us?

And get ready for the unveil of the Democrat-Funded ‘AmericansElect’ PArty, to peel off just enough swing-votes in Swing States to insure an Obama win.

[bestrongbpositive]

I’m not happy to have Willard but I’ll take him over the SOB that we have now !!

[Yashcheritsiy]

Think outside your box, you spineless “conservative.”

[geologist]

Given the two choices, Romney is a must. Where is an opportunity for any other candidate?

A brokered convention?

I gladly will vote for another conservative, if there is such a possibility.

How can it be?

God help America to be restored to our former faith and hope in Thee and to Godly values, in Jesus name, amen

[jmstein7]

BTTT

[loveliberty2]

"Unlike Romney, who merely has a propensity to sway with public opinion, Obama openly defies public opinion to enact his radical agenda – by any means. Obama has now abused and exceeded Constitutional executive powers by fiat – either by means of executive orders, agency decrees (rules), or machinations of the Justice Department via his radical co-conspirator, Eric Holder– to get what he wants. To leave him in power for four years as a lame duck President would not be merely foolish – it would be dangerous. Romney, in contrast, merely annoys me by his regular conciliation and apparent lack of core values. That said, I would rather live in annoyance of Romney than in constant terror and fear of Obama, and what he might do next, if given the opportunity. He must be denied such opportunity. So, yes, I will cast my vote for Romney, but I will not do anything to actively support him or the elites who foisted him upon me. I will, instead, punish the GOP-e while working to depose Obama by other means, and to keep a President Romney in check."

This is, by far, the most convincing rationale for examining "the People's" November choice.

What does it mean to be a "conservative"? Surely, that description should be applied to citizens who understand and wish to preserve (conserve) the principles and ideas stated in the Declaration of Independence and structured into a form of self-government in a written Constitution--a "People's" Constitution to restrain their government.

If, by reading the writings and speeches of the Founders and early Supreme Court Justices, we understand, as Justice Story wrote in his "Commentaries . . . ," that "the People" are the Constitution's "ONLY KEEPERS," then our primary weapon against approaching tyranny is "the People's" assertion of their role, as expounded by THE FEDERALIST and Justice Story, among others.

How does that relate to this discussion?

The first sentence of the above-quoted article states it clearly. The current President neither recognizes the supremacy of the Constitution nor "the People," who, acccording to the Founders, are its originators and ONLY KEEPERS. His "we can't wait" line ignores both the Constitution's division of powers, separations of powers, checks and balances, and its up-front Preamble assertion that it is "We, the People" who are in charge of the government's coercive power, including that of the Executive Branch.

Deliberation and debate, ordered public consideration of measures which may assert power over individuals was intended as a protection for "the People" against government power, notwithstanding potential crises and urgencies.

If a main concern of today's "conservatives" about the current candidate to run in Fall 2012 is that he is too subject to changes of opinion in response to "the People," then perhaps that might be turned to advantage by a well-informed, educated, citizenry who understand their Constitution and can/will hold that candidate to account for his actions whenever they tend to ignore, bypass, or deliberately flaunt their written limits on his Executive power.

Clearly, if Obama is allowed to be re-elected, either through preference, or by some form of "righteous indignation" that the opposing candidate is not "conservative" enough, then future generations may look back on this generation with scorn.

If our choice is between an arrogant candidate committed and determined to substitution of his own ideology and will over "the People's" Constitution and a candidate whose desire to be President makes him subject to changing his mind when "the People" speak, then which candidate presents the greater challenge for us to do our job of protecting liberty?

Just questions for consideration by thoughtful "KEEPERS" of the Constitution.

"§ 1907. If these Commentaries shall but inspire in the rising generation a more ardent love of their country, an unquenchable thirst for liberty, and a profound reverence for the constitution and the Union, then they will have accomplished all, that their author ought to desire. Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of fife, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence. The structure has been erected by architects of consummate skill and fidelity; its foundations are solid; its compartments are beautiful, as well as useful; its arrangements are full of wisdom and order; and its defences are impregnable from without. It has been reared for immortality, if the work of man may justly aspire to such a title. It may, nevertheless, perish in an hour by the folly, or corruption, or negligence of its only keepers, THE PEOPLE. Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them." - Justice Joseph Story, Concluding paragraph of "Commentaries on the Constitution . . . ."

[jmstein7]

Spot-on!

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Did you watch GBTV’s show about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the Obama Admin? Are you saying that what has happened would continue the same under Romney?

THAT is exactly the point I have tried to make here. I have been taken to task at every turn by the Romney haters. I hate him too but we now have NO choice in November but Romney. To do otherwise means the outright destruction of this nation.
Yes, Romney is objectionable but the alternative is unacceptable.

I have tried to stay out of this argument with Romney haters. I will continue to do so. But to those who will write in Ron Paul or Gingrich to assuage their consciences...yes Romney was shoved down our throats...but I hope you like Obama up your @$$, because that's what you are going to get.

Bow down before the One you server.
You're going to get what you deserve.

[stevie_d_64]

Bingo!!!

I am not concerned about what future generations will think of me...

I am extremely concerned that mine and others efforts will, and have been, suplanted to keep us from effecting a correction in the course this country is being forced to steer...

I always ask this rhetorical, personal question that does not require a public answer, it is the ultimate gut-check in this day and age...

“What are you prepared to do about this? And what are you willing to sacrifice for it?”

We still have the ability every two years to effect a correction, and every time it becomes harder and harder to get people to participate other than yelling and screaming at the TV, or over heated conversations at the water-cooler...

If you are concerned about how future generations will view us, lets make as much of a correction as possible, do not be caught up in the top race this November...You need to make sure the down ballot races are taken care of...That is as critical as winning back the WH...

Duplicate yourself, do not bother trying to convince a family memner to go vote with you on election day...Get a nieghbor, friend, co-worker...We have time to talk this issue up...And on election day get up, go pick up your voting partner aqnd go get a cup of coffee and get it done!!! Just do it!!! If you can triple the participation or more, do that...

As long as we have this ability to voice our opinion at the polls, we can do this...

When and if we lose that, then obviously some other options come into play...And everyone will lose at that point...

I’d kinda like to keep it civil...But hey, thats just me...I know where my limitations, and line in the sand is drawn...

We can still fix this, and those that are not going to like what we want to do, can go pound sand as far as I am concerned...

We vote to unite, not to divide like they want to do...

[familyop]

The vain, socialist, bipartisan bandwagon can have its politics to itself and take all of the credit for the consequences. No sale and no vote.

Ignore the busybody, government-dependent harridan.

[hotsteppa]

So basically its BOHICA for the GOP-E. What happened to core conservative values for some ppl on this site. I am so disillusioned by my fellow colleagues here...:(. even Rush, who i have admired for years seems to be playing the GOP-E tune. Very discouraging.

[jmstein7]

Easy to ignore - until they come after YOU in some way, shape or form. Expect it.

[Ditter]

I talk to a lot of Conservatives, liberals and independents......... the only time I hear that people will vote for a 3rd party or stay home rather than vote for Romney is right here on FR. All others say that they will vote for ANYONE even Romney to kick obozo out of the WH!