Skip to comments.
Moderates, Romney Wreak Havoc at National Convention - Will They Destroy the Republican Party?
Texas Conservative Republican News ^
| 8/27/2012
| David Bellow
Posted on 08/27/2012 8:37:56 PM PDT by davidbellow
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
To: Nifster
Yes, things are moving towards unity in the GOP. This is a unity that is necessary for the win.
21
posted on
08/27/2012 9:44:12 PM PDT
by
jonrick46
(Countdown to 11-06-2012)
To: Fiji Hill
you know what sucked. the first time i was old enough to vote, i cast my ballot for nixon.
wage & price controls, and a whole lot of nonsense. then another moderate, ford. disappointment #2. then the peanut farmer! i left the military then, cuz he couldn’t command a toy boat in a bathtub.
should have stayed! would have served under the greatest president in the 20th century, Ronald Reagan. my mistake.
then we got bush sr. got in on reagan’s coatails, no conviction “read my lips”.
which gave us the philander in chief, the clintoons. it was a package deal.
after that, “W”. not much for compassionate conserativism. blow the piss out of their countries, no nation rebuilding, if they try something again,bomb them over. after a period of time they will learn, if not they can meet allah before their time.
then we get to the obamantion. not an american, yea call me a birther. that could be remedied with a $12 or $15 request for a real birth certificate. I will gladly pay for it at no cost to the imposter in chief.
Besides, i have a problem with muslims. i would not allow a mosque to be in america, they cannot defend the Constitution (well, hell, the rats can’t do that either). No place in America.
I actually think that you should be literate enough to vote, and if you are sucking off the government tit you shouldn’t be allowed to anyway, cuz u got no skin in the game.
of course, i am radical. got it from my dad, and goldwater, and wm f. buckley jr. and ronald reagan.
blessings, i must needs to go to bed, 1 beer too many.
bobo
22
posted on
08/27/2012 9:47:49 PM PDT
by
bobo1
To: piytar
Just a question: What is it for you to gain to see Zer0 win and Romney lose?
23
posted on
08/27/2012 9:47:49 PM PDT
by
jonrick46
(Countdown to 11-06-2012)
To: davidbellow
This issue has not been dropped as some media/GOPe types would have you believe.
We conservative delegates have not fought this long and hard to hand our right to select our own delegates over not only to a party hack but to the left in our own party that want us shut out of everything-count on it!
Yes, today, this might be about Ron Paul but it can easily be about any pro-life, pro-family conservative in the future.
This is not about Paul, it is about a voice of the people, some might even call it about "choice."
Just as in the pro-life debate vs choice, we are for choice, we just choose life!
24
posted on
08/27/2012 10:18:13 PM PDT
by
zerosix
(Nnative sunflower)
To: jonrick46
Nothing. But I am no longer sure there is anything for us in seeing Romney win.
25
posted on
08/27/2012 10:23:38 PM PDT
by
piytar
(The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
To: Marcella
26
posted on
08/27/2012 10:26:00 PM PDT
by
Marcella
(Conservatism is dead. PREPARE)
To: piytar
Don't give up on the GOP just yet.
There are more of us conservatives today in Tampa than there are of the RINOs.
A number of us from the various state conventions ousted the RINOs little by little as precinct committeemen and women and it is we who vote on our Delegates and we aren't handing that back to the RINOs to hand select us.
We control the rules and the platform committees and that's why they are trying to shut down the voices of the right, of the TEA Party but they aren't going to accomplish it.
27
posted on
08/27/2012 10:28:19 PM PDT
by
zerosix
(Nnative sunflower)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
the poster of the article has already received the ZOT.
28
posted on
08/27/2012 10:29:23 PM PDT
by
onyx
(FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
To: jonrick46
Nothing. But I am no longer sure there is anything for us in seeing Romney win.
29
posted on
08/27/2012 10:32:49 PM PDT
by
piytar
(The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
To: piytar
Edmund Burke: The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
30
posted on
08/27/2012 10:35:42 PM PDT
by
jonrick46
(Countdown to 11-06-2012)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Bellow is no longer here (retread).
31
posted on
08/27/2012 10:37:04 PM PDT
by
Marcella
(Conservatism is dead. PREPARE)
To: TheOldLady
Bellow was retread. Jim zotted him.
32
posted on
08/27/2012 10:38:50 PM PDT
by
Marcella
(Conservatism is dead. PREPARE)
To: TheOldLady; darkwing104; 50mm
hope the kitties, are hungry/playful..
give 'em this Fmr. FReeper.
33
posted on
08/27/2012 10:41:38 PM PDT
by
skinkinthegrass
(WA DC E$tabli$hment; DNC/RNC/Unionists...Brazilian saying: "$@me Old $hit; w/ different flie$" :^)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
You are exactly right. I can smell democrat operatives a mile away. They all post together soon after any anti-Romney thread is started.
To: bobo1
Don’t feel too bad! I have a bit more wine than I need to have at this time but I will tell you that I am an old time Republican! Or even an old time Democrat such as Harry Truman! Or even Dwight Eisenhower! They both loved America and tried to do what’s right by it.
I am not comfortable with Romney but I believe in “Anybody but Obama” mode of thinking at this time. Any talk of third party talk is rubbish as far as I’m concerned! Remember Perot! He gave it to Clinton! Our Blowjob-in-Chief! Guess it must be nice be a President! eh?
Guess I’d better go to bed! Too many wine!
35
posted on
08/27/2012 10:54:38 PM PDT
by
Sen Jack S. Fogbound
(We have met the enemy and they is us! After all, who voted Obama in?)
To: jonrick46
36
posted on
08/27/2012 10:57:18 PM PDT
by
Nifster
To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
hey buddy, yea, i am going to bed too.
all the old people loved America whether they were rats or pubs.
now we have in office people that hate America.
they called “Ike” a golfer. the obamanation has surpassed him.
Blessings, bobo
37
posted on
08/27/2012 11:19:37 PM PDT
by
bobo1
To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
you are cool. i can relate to you. will write you back at a late time.
Blessings, bobo
38
posted on
08/27/2012 11:40:52 PM PDT
by
bobo1
To: davidbellow
Malkin and Palin are both going at this on FB.
We nee”There is a VERY IMPORTANT BATTLE taking place at the RNC between grass-roots conservatives and party bosses. The GOP brass want to take away the states’ time-honored power to elect delegates.”
Wonder if Rush will take this on tomorrow.
39
posted on
08/28/2012 12:06:02 AM PDT
by
I still care
(I miss my friends, bagels, and the NYC skyline - but not the taxes. I love the South.)
To: davidbellow
Jack Kerwick wrote an article on May 24, 2011 titled
The Tea Partier versus The Republican and he expressed some important issues that I agree with.
Thus far, the field of GOP presidential contenders, actual and potential, isnt looking too terribly promising.
This, though, isnt meant to suggest that any of the candidates, all things being equal, lack what it takes to insure
that Barack Obama never sees the light of a second term; nor is it the case that I find none of the candidates appealing.
Rather, I simply mean that at this juncture, the party faithful is far from unanimously energized over any of them.
It is true that it was the rapidity and aggressiveness with which President Obama proceeded to impose his perilous designs upon the country
that proved to be the final spark to ignite the Tea Party movement.
But the chain of events that lead to its emergence began long before Obama was elected.
That is, it was actually the disenchantment with the Republican Party under our compassionate conservative president, George W. Bush,
which overcame legions of conservatives that was the initial inspiration that gave rise to the Tea Party.
It is this frustration with the GOPs betrayal of the values that it affirms that accounts for why the overwhelming majority
of those who associate with or otherwise sympathize with the Tea Party movement
refuse to explicitly or formally identify with the Republican Party.
And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers threat to create a third party
in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.
If and when those conservatives and libertarians who compose the bulk of the Tea Party, decided that the Republican establishment
has yet to learn the lessons of 06 and 08, choose to follow through with their promise,
they will invariably be met by Republicans with two distinct but interrelated objections.
First, they will be told that they are utopian, purists foolishly holding out for an ideal candidate.
Second, because virtually all members of the Tea Party would have otherwise voted Republican if not for this new third party, they will be castigated for essentially giving elections away to Democrats.
Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.
Lets begin with the argument against purism. To this line, two replies are in the coming.
No one, as far as I have ever been able to determine, refuses to vote for anyone who isnt an ideal candidate.
Ideal candidates, by definition, dont exist.
This, after all, is what makes them ideal.
This counter-objection alone suffices to expose the argument of the Anti-Purist as so much counterfeit.
But there is another consideration that militates decisively against it.
A Tea Partier who refrains from voting for a Republican candidate who shares few if any of his beliefs
can no more be accused of holding out for an ideal candidate
than can someone who refuses to marry a person with whom he has little to anything in common
be accused of holding out for an ideal spouse.
In other words, the object of the argument against purism is the most glaring of straw men:I will not vote for a thoroughly flawed candidate is one thing;
I will only vote for a perfect candidate is something else entirely.
As for the second objection against the Tea Partiers rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.
Every election seasonand at no time more so than this past seasonRepublicans pledge to reform Washington, trim down the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for compromise and patience.
Well, when the Tea Partiers impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.
For example,
as Glenn Beck once correctly noted in an interview with Katie Couric,
had John McCain been elected in 2008, it is not at all improbable that, in the final analysis,
the country would have been worse off than it is under a President Obama.
McCain would have furthered the countrys leftward drift,
but because this movement would have been slower,
and because McCain is a Republican, it is not likely that the apparent awakening that occurred under Obama would have occurred under McCain.
It may be worth it, the Tea Partier can tell Republicans, for the GOP to lose some elections if it means that conservativesand the countrywill ultimately win.
If he didnt know it before, the Tea Partier now knows that accepting short-term loss in exchange for long-term gain is the essence of compromise, the essence of politics.
Ironically, he can thank the Republican for impressing this so indelibly upon him.
I'm fresh out of
"patience", and I'm not in the mood for
"compromise".
"COMPROMISE" to me is a dirty word.
Let the
RINO's compromise their values, with the conservatives, for a change.
The "Establishment Republicans" can go to hell!
40
posted on
08/28/2012 12:21:16 AM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple, fight or die!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson