Posted on 10/03/2012 8:46:15 PM PDT by GodAndCountryFirst
I don't mean to pee on the parade of all the Mitt fans here. But did anybody else notice how Romney threw the Tea Party and conservatives in general under the bus tonight. He has disavowed every conservative position he has ever PRETENDED to take.
I am pissed.
From a hard core Conservative...
Only a Ronbot or Trotskyite would make such a useless, inconsequential, incompetent and irrevelant statement!
No he will not. Where are the secret videos of this?
Secret videos of what is to come? LOL That’s request is a little unhinged.
The next issue is will Romney’s coat tails cause democrats to flee from Obama.
Will Obama be uninvited in areas of tight races?
“do wish he would have mentioned Obama’s forcing Catholic institutions to fund birth control in Obamacare.”
He alluded to religious liberty in the governing question. its a ‘dog whistle’ on the HHS mandate.
He covered a lot of ground and I was particularly pleased and surprised to hear him totally eviscerate Obamacare.
Anyone doubting that he will repeal Obamacare can rest easy. Yes, they will put back some regs and gimmes, but the main thrust of Obamacare was to use the ‘pre-existing condition’ excuse as a camel’s nose for nationalized healthare.
Under Romney, that is all going away.
I think he’s more conservative than his reputation is amongst the Freepers. The fact is that a southern conservative could not have won Massachuttes no matter what, so Romney had to run a bit to the left, than you’re comfortable with, to get that state.
Jimmy Carter’s grandson had filmed Mitt Romney saying some very conservative things, so I’m inclined to believe that he’s acceptable for most conservatives.
Yes he is.
And still a better pick than the communist, or the 3rd party “not a snowball’s chance in he11” spoilers.
I think some of that Obamacare answer was a smokescreen. I don’t see how pre-existing conditions can be covered without a big tax to pay for them, or massively rising health insurance costs. This is where I fear Romney is making too many promises he can’t keep which could obviously hit him in 2016.
He also should have mentioned how long the Obamacare bill is vs. Romneycare. Something like 3,000 to 80 pages I think.
“But did anybody else notice how Romney threw the Tea Party and conservatives in general under the bus tonight.”(?)
Actually, no I didn’t see that at all. I saw an incompetent, leftist, commie, community organizer get his ass handed to him and then kicked down the stairs.
I am not listening to the BS coming from the likes of you anymore. You are as bad as the leftists. (Second thought..you probably are a leftist). Get lost!!
THE crushing blow.
OBAMACARE IS A HUGE ISSUE AND A BIG WINNER on so many conservative fronts:
______________________________________________________
Michelle Bachman, bless her everlovin heart could not have done as well as this Romney guy did. Who is he? He is not who I was led to believe he was.
Romney was full of conservative statements tonight. A few not conservative, for instance education, the first department I would get rid of.
Romney however was not talking to conservatives, the base, he was speaking to the 6% who decide elections.
I almost cried when he referred to the constitution. He didn’t have to take something out of his pocket and read it, he was familiar enough with it to quote it. Obama was supposed to be a constitutional scholar, he didn’t look like it tonight.
I was out of my chair tonight jumping up and down at Romneys answers, they were conservative. They weren’t Libertarian but they were definitely conservative.
For the first time in this election cycle I am starting to get excited. I may have to even send a check, something I never thought I would be doing for the likes of Mitt Romney who I thought was much more moderate than he sounded tonight.
I hope to God he's right.
Yes, Romney’s a liberal Republican...No, he’s not the most liberal we could have ended up with nominating...
We’re at the point it’s a bit late for “buyer’s remorse” and “told ya so”...Our chosen Republican candidate is who he is, and we all know what we’ve had for the past nearly 4 years...For better or worse, time now to support Romney and make the best of it...
Either a Democrat or a Republican will be the next President...Personally, I prefer it be a Republican...The alternative prospect of an Obama second term is too dismal and bitter to contemplate...
This reprint by Mike Rosen has been posted on FR before, just prior to the 2008 election...It’s worth re-posting and reading...Substitute Romney for McCain...
Mr. Rosen makes a lot of sense (as usual)...
ROSEN: Party Trumps Person
By Mike Rosen, Rocky Mountain News
Published October 10, 2008
A superficial cliche goes something like this: “I’m an independent thinker; I vote the person, not the party.” This pronouncement is supposed to demonstrate open-mindedness and political sophistication on the part of the pronouncer. Hey, it’s your vote; cast it any way you like - or not at all. But idealism and naivete about the way our electoral process, government and politics work shouldn’t be mistaken for wisdom.
For better or worse, we have a two-party system. Either a Republican, John McCain, or a Democrat, Barack Obama, is going to be our next president. No one else has a chance. Not Ralph Nader, not the Libertarian candidate, the Communist or the Green. Minor-party candidates are sometimes spoilers - like Nader costing Al Gore the presidency in 2000 - but they don’t win presidential elections. Ross Perot got 20 million popular votes in 1992, and exactly zero Electoral College votes.
In Europe’s multiparty, parliamentary democracies, governing coalitions are formed after an election. In our constitutional republic, the coalitions are already in place.
The Republican coalition is an alliance of conservatives, middle- and upper-income taxpayers (but not leftist Hollywood millionaires and George Soros), individualists who prefer limited government, those who are pro-market and pro-business, believers in American exceptionalism and a strong national defense, social issues conservatives and supporters of traditional American values.
The Democratic coalition includes guilt-ridden liberals, collectivists, labor unions (especially the teachers’ unions), government workers, academics, plaintiffs-lawyers, lower- and middle-income net tax-receivers, identity-politics minorities, feminists, gays, enviros, nannyists and activists for assorted anti-gun, anti-capitalist, anti-business, anti-military, and world-government causes.
I say party trumps person because regardless of the individual occupying the White House, his party’s coalition will be served. A Democratic president, for example, whether liberal or moderate (conservative Democrats, if any still exist, can’t survive the nominating process), can only operate within the political boundaries of his party’s coalition. The party that wins the presidency will fill Cabinet and sub-Cabinet discretionary positions in the executive branch with members of its coalition. Likewise, the coalition will be the dominant source of nominees to the federal courts, ambassadorships, appointments to boards and commissions, and a host of plum jobs handed out to those with political IOUs to cash in.
It works the same way in the legislative branch. After the individual members of a new Congress have been seated, a nose count is taken and the party with the most noses wins control of all committee and subcommittee chairmanships, the locus of legislative power.
Let’s say you’re a registered Republican who prefers that party’s philosophy of governance. And you’re a fair-minded, well-intentioned person who happens to like a certain moderately conservative Democrat running for U.S. Senate. So you decide to cross party lines and vote for him. As it turns out, he wins, giving Democrats a one-vote majority, 51-49. Congratulations! You just got Charles Schumer, Patrick Leahy, Diane Feinstein and Hillary Clinton as key committee chairs and a guarantee that your Republican legislative agenda will be stymied.
That’s the way the process works. Does this mean that in our two-party system it comes down to choosing between the lesser of evils? Exactly! If we had 300 million custom-tailored minor parties, everyone could find his perfect match. But that’s not practical. You can be a purist and cast your vote symbolically with a fringe party, or be a player and settle for the least imperfect of the Republican or Democrat alternatives.
A vote for McCain is a vote for the party of constitutionalist judges, Adam Smith, the NRA, Gen. David Petraeus and Ronald Reagan. A vote for Obama is a vote for judicial activism, Karl Marx, the ACLU, the NEA, the AFL-CIO, the NAACP, Al Gore, Cindy Sheehan, Keith Olbermann and Rosie O’Donnell.
Your vote; your choice.
” I don’t see how pre-existing conditions can be covered without a big tax to pay for them”
The liberals have consistently overstated how big this problem is. It’s about 6-9 million people.
#1 - it about continuing coverage. Not losing coverage you already have. Actually, Obama said something to indicate what’s at work, because he complained that it is already the law. Just modestly strengthening that is enough.
#2 - you can ‘cover’ pre-existing with a govt program to cover just that condition, thereby avoiding price controls that will destroy insurance markets. Texas has a program like that. It’s not hard to do that at Federal level via S-chip.
The mistake would be to go #3 - community rating. Then you fall down the slippery slope to obamacare. That’s what Republicans must avoid.
If Romney is true to Federalism word, he wont necessarily force any choice, but let states do it their way.
“He also should have mentioned how long the Obamacare bill is vs. Romneycare. Something like 3,000 to 80 pages I think.”
Right! A good way to illustrate how different they are.
one is a honda civic, the other is a HUmmer.
I know what I saw tonight, Romney is great leadership material, he understands exactly what he is talking about. Romney represents traditional values, Obama is a marxist who was brought up to idolize a father he never knew because his father held the same marxist views that were passed on to the son. Very strange, considering that the father didn’t even raise his own son. Yet you have it in for Romney? Oh really? You do realize that Obama is very radical? Or perhaps you didn’t notice? Tell me again, what do the two men have in common? Considering the fact that Obama was seething with hatred for Romney, so I highly doubt that the two have anything in common at all, as you suggest. So I have to question your motives? Cause they sure don’t seem pure, cause you seem to have an agenda. And it has nothing to do with who Romney is as a man, but rather, that you think he is standing in the way of someone else, who you think is so great. If they are so great, then where are they? And why couldn’t they win the nomination? Cause I can tell you this much, no one handed the nomination to Romney, he fought for it, and it showed tonight, that Romney knows how to fight. The fact that Romney knew he was in a fight with Obama is proof the two have nothing in common, despite your claims.
Conservatives may not like to hear about working “across the aisle”, but that's what moderates & independents like to hear. We NEED those votes! I wish we didn't, but it's a political fact of life.
Obama MUST be defeated! Romney is our ONLY hope. He was my last choice, but he won. So now, he is my first choice.
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.