Skip to comments.OK ... some of you are really ticked at me
Posted on 03/08/2012 6:17:49 PM PST by SolRosenburg
Sorry .. mea culpa. Somehow I missed the memo detailing how my primary function on the radio is to say things that you will all agree with so that nobody will get mad at me. Now, from the looks of the email and Twitter, some of you dont like me very much at all. Most of you I dont know personally so Ill survive. Some of the folks that are, shall we say, royally pissed, are friends. Now that hurts. But Ive always been honest with both my friends and my listeners on how I feel about the issues .. and that doesnt stop during the Year of Talking Dangerously.
OK so why are folks mad? Because yesterday on the show I revealed that I voted for Mitt Romney in the Florida Primary, and that if I were eligible to vote in Georgia I would have voted for him yesterday as well. Voting in two states wouldnt have been nice so I didnt.
Not that my opinions here are worth any more but yours, but heres where I stand on this all-important contest as of right now.
(Excerpt) Read more at boortz.com ...
Not even close is right.
Limbaugh always criticizes those who said Reagan was unelectable. But in pushing Romney he’s telling us exactly the same thing about Newt. Very sad—like a general going AWOL in the midst of battle.
And that would be a complete mischaracterization of how Santorum would govern. Santorum is not pushing for Catholic religious norms to be ensconced in American law. But Mitt is an active bishop of the LDS.
Who is this dick-wad?
cause they all work for clear channel
Good. I hope it helps Romney lose.
What I hear in Santorum’s voice and what I hear in Newt’s are very different.
Boortz has always been more libertarian - conservative.
Which still doesn’t explain how he ended up voting Romney.
Rush has said on many occasions that conservatism always wins elections. ALWAYS!
I totally agree and I'm sick and tired of letting the MSM pick our candidates for us.
Perhaps you could have kept your mouth shut? Especially on an anti-mittens website?
I despise Romney, but will be voting for him over Obama.
It’s time for a little rant:
Conservatives lose because they don’t CARE enough. Motivation is not strong enough. They are too busy making a living, taking care of their families, deer hunting, etc.
I work alongside dim activists in every election. They CARE about their causes. It is common to find that they not only contribute money, they use their vacation to walk precincts, and a lot of their time after work goes to meetings and volunteer work.
Here I am in the conservative heart of Texas and I cannot find people who will sign up for full time, PAID positions such as Election Clerk for Early Voting.
We cannot even fill the need for Republican Alternate Election Judges, let alone having enough Poll Watchers. I have had to resort to hiring Democrats to help me run elections. BTW, I have encouraged the honest ones to become Election Judges themselves.
I don’t know about each of you, but I find a lot of “keyboard activists” on our side. Even the most vehement, vocal conservatives I meet just cannot find the time for a bit of volunteering.
Conservative losses are not a mystery or a conspiracy. I have seen what happens on the ground.
As long as this remains the case, we will continue to be led by professional pols like Romney.
Follow the money...
tip....Bain “needs” the executive office...and MUCH of the GOP-e is personally “invested” with them.
Agreed, but it is how he would be perceived by the electorate based on his own statements.
Here is Santorum yammering on about how he thinks contraception is "not okay" and how he wants to talk about it as President:
One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, Well, thats okay. Contraceptions okay. Its not okay..."
Sorry, but we are trying to elect a President, not a priest. This sort of talk is absolute poison to a general election audience. Santorum would lose in a landslide that would take our house majority with it. Rick would lose near the entire midde/moderate/indie/libertine voter demographic(s) that are open to our message on debt, out of control spending, etc, but will not vote for someone who wants to discuss things like the evils of contraception.
I heard him the other day ridiculing a caller for being pro-life, which he snidely told the caller “it isn’t pro-life—it’s anti-choice. Get that right.” and I said, “no thanks.” and turned him off.
I like Boortz, but I am not buying the ‘Only Romney can win’ argument. The two main issues this election need to be Obamacare and jobs. If we go with Romney, we are down to one issue. We need the base to turn out in massive numbers. That won’t happen with Romney. He is a very unexciting candidate as far as I can tell. No one is getting fired up about Romney and that isn’t going to change. We need someone who will really take it to Obama and not play Mr. Nice Guy like McCain did in 2008. We all know how that worked out. As for the other candidates, it is unlikely they can beat Obama either. Gingrich is viewed as mean and a Washington insider. Paul is considered too radical by a large portion of the electorate. Santorum has almost single-highhandedly lost the GOP the female and Independent vote. He lost his own state in 2006 by 17 points. Where does that leave us? Gingrich is my favorite among the candidates left. Not because I strongly feel he could win, but because it would be exciting to watch him take on Obama one-on-one. It looks bad for the GOP and conservatives in particular this presidential election cycle. We should have picked the best ‘pretty conservative’ choice early on and quit attacking every candidate as not conservative enough. Our only hope now is for no candidate to have enough delegates and a brokered convention. Then, we could bring in a new candidate that is acceptable to most of the base and who has not been scarred by this brutal election cycle. I would wish for Paul Ryan, but others would be better than Romney or the rest of the current GOP field. The odds of this happening are low.
Part of the problem is that it is addressing the issue from the negative side. Rather than calling contraception (or whatever) bad, identify the opposite thing, sex saved for marriage and fully open to procreation, as good. This fits a biblical model of one role of good government (Romans 13), i.e. praising what is good.
“Why? Why are all of them pushing Romney when he is not representative of conservatism?”
I do wonder about Boortz...he comes on strong but then he’s mushy when it counts. On one hand he said he wants to see Newt win, but he voted for Romney because he’s going to be the nominee so we need to coalesce around him.
Another example of his mushiness - during the Floriduh fiasco Boortz actually said GWB should let the thugs take it and we could come back stronger in four years.
Makes real sense, Neal...
“Mitt is a recipe for a second term of Obama.”
I dunno. The logic is that Mittens is moderate enough to
draw Democrats, moderates, and fence sitters who do not like Obumbo.
While I think Newt is the smartest one on the block, he terrifys moderats and moralist.
All of us would vote for Romney over Obumber.
Or even as the pro-aborts say, pro-life is a choice. Urging that one choice is better or wiser than another is somehow a Bad Thing? Boortz is not worth getting bent out of shape over. He won’t see things from a godly perspective so why expect him to. Just tune him out and go on.
Me, too. Sick of the MSM.
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.