Nothing wrong you say?
|
Posted on 07/03/2010 10:40:57 PM PDT by TheTeaPartyChannel
There's Probably At Least 12 Candidates On The List. Let us hear who you want to see in that position. I am sure many conservatives will push for either Sarah Palin,Mitt Romney or Ron Paul. Never the less, we have plenty of "A-List Conservatives" to consider. WHO's YOUR PICK ?
America will never forget that while Gov. Palin
helped the Tea Parties and fought ObamaCARE,
where was the perpetual soreloser Mitt Romney?
Why, Romney was backing Obama (again).
Elizabeth Cheney Perry!
Ken Blackwell would be good choice to replace Steele.
Ken Blackwell or Liz Cheney would be great.
“Ken Blackwell would be good choice to replace Steele.”
YEPPERS INDEED - a real conservative.
I know just asking that simple question gets one called a Romneybot, but don't we all want Obama to finish the wars and stand up to auto unions?
Sarah will be busy whupping Obozo’s sorry Marxist hinder in two years; and even busier running the country for the next eight years after that.
How about Marco Rubio, we may need him as VP in case Obama tries to buy votes from the Hispanics again. Rubio as VP will be a slap in the face to Obama should he run in 2012.
Agreed. Steele has been a complete failure. Whenever I've heard Blackwell, he's come across as unapologetically conservative and can articulate the ideas we need people to hear. Steele always sounds like he has no idea what he's supposed to be saying.
A real Conservative. Someone who lives it and not someone who just talks it. Other than that, I really don’t care... as long as that leftist apologist Steele goes away.
Ken Blackwell.
Blackwell. No alternative names, please.
|
Marco Rubio opposes the AZ law. A hispanic Mitt Romney or Mel Martinez 2.
This might be just the job for Newt. I think he’s recently spat out whatever Kool-Aid he was drinking and has sobered up.
He’d be a damn sight better than Steele, that’s for sure.
Why can't you just answer my original question, which was about one specific quote, instead of trying to claim I support something else he said, which I did not?
You're being dishonest.
I’m all for Ken Blackwell getting the job. He would be absolutely PERFECT!
Everyone agrees with you, except for the voters of Ohio. He got CRUSHED in his gubernatorial run in 2006. He showed ZERO ability to connect with voters by articulate a compelling message. His campaign was poorly planned and executed. If you were to write a case study about how to mismanage a gubernatorial campaign, Blackwell's might be the one you'd choose to profile.
Plus, what's just as important in that job as message control, is executive experience. Blackwell is nice guy and perhaps he's a great conservative, but he was an OH Secretary of State that was besieged with problems, and his ability to manage those problems was wanting, at best. Blackwell may have a role, but not as party Chairman.
Blackwell is a horrible speaker. I vote for Liz if those are the choices.
It is YOU who is dishonest. I said,
“Mitt Romney (backstabber) backs TARP and ObamaCARE (=RomneyCARE). Nothing wrong you say?”
The TARP endorsement by Romney is above in post #2.
So you now claim that Romney does NOT back RomneyCARE
and ObamaCARE. WOW!!!!! Go Mythster.
I’m probably unfairly basing my decision on Blackwell on one interview, but this is the one:
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/196/42523/
Thanks for the information. I didn’t know any of that, just based my thoughts on the impression I got of him. back to the drawing board...Lynn Cheney too old?
Exactly. And that is why Team Romney threw the election
to Obama and the DNC by attacking Gov. Palin.
Agreed.Should have been the guy all along but we dont get to pick rnc chair.
Yes, Ken is a well spoken person and would be great.
I don't think so. She's about the same age as Hilary, maybe just a year or two older. Plus, she lives in NoVA.
Whomever they pick, has to have had successful administrative experience, know how to fund raise like nobody's business, and be very media savvy hopefully by demonstrating prior success with at least a couple of national or at least statewide political campaigns.
Should Michael Steele Resign, Who Would Be The Ideal Replacement?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My short list:
1)John Bolton
2) Tom Delay
3) Sarah Palin
OK, I tried to have a straightforward discussion with you. You couldn't handle it and started calling names. Sorry you have to behave like a brat who can't answer simple questions.
“Mitt Romney (backstabber) backs TARP and ObamaCARE (=RomneyCARE). Nothing wrong you say?”
Which has absolutely zero to do with my original question, which was (as you can see right there on the post itself) a response to Post #2--go ahead and look at my post, which was not a post to post #1, but to post #2.
This is the Romeny quote in post #2 I've left in the quotes from Romney--so you won't accuse me of censorship, simply go back to post #2 and see the entire quote):
"I also think it's important for us to nod to the president when he's right,"
Romney said.... he's pleased with the president's plans to "finish the job" in Iraq and Afghanistan
He also applauded the president for standing up to the auto industry. "I hope he continues to be tough"
....Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, saying that after a series of initial missteps, "I think he's finally getting close to the right answer."
So--what is wrong with saying we have to point out when the president is right? (If he's ever right about anything, I sure will say so.) If Obama came out and said something we agree with, like, say, when he approved waaaay back when of killing the pirate who was holding one of our people, shouldn't we say "OK, we agree with that"? Doesn't that show that our criticism is to be taken with the same weight?
Don't we all want Obama to finish the job in Iraq and Afghanistan? The RIGHT way, yes, but isn't that specifically what we want?
Don't we all want Obama to stand up to unions? Isn't saying this laying the groundwork to later say "Well, he didn't continue to be tough"?
Ditto for "I think he's finally getting close to the right answer."--isn't that another political comment, setting up a later, "Alas..."?
I asked a simple question about a specific quote.
You didn't want to answer it, and lied, claiming I was supporting ANOTHER quote (which I did not support--an honest person will come right out and say that).
Please explain how that is anything but dishonesty.
I expect you'll just respond as you did before, so that's that. But if we want to be taken seriously by those we have to convince to come to our way of thinking, we have to start by being honest with and about each other.
I want to be clear.
I was referring to The Kenyan Usurper (I try very hard not to write or speak its name.)
That being said, I don’t trust Romney either. My perception is that he is just a younger, healthier and smarter version of McCain.
I just changed my tagline. The one I was using was a quote from Ayn Rand. “In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.”
The Kenyan is Evil. Romney is a Compromise.
But nothing he said in the quote I asked about is so terrible. He said he hoped Obama finishes the wars, stands up to unions, and that Geithner gets to the right place. Foolish hopes, but these are political statements I don't disagree with--I want Obama to finish the wars (the right way), stand up to unions, and get a clue.
This rabid hatred for Romney is bizarre when it turns people into , uh, people who just slobber whenever they have the opportunity. It's tiring and anti-intellectual. We need to discuss issues, not just lie about people as the poster has on this thread about me, because I had the audacity to point to ONE quote Romney said, and suggested that in that one, single quote, Romney might not be the anti-Christ.
For that, I guess, I'm a Romneybot.
Uh, ok...
Romney is a Compromise.
Who's disagreeing with you?
You defend Romney's support of Obama on Afganistan
where he has increased the murders of Americans by preventing normal ROE.
You defend Romney's support of Obama on TARP and excessive spending
when it has destroyed the country.
You defend Romney's support of Obama on his union use
when it has wrought violence against conservatives.
You probably also defend Romney's support of Obama
on his absence of a birth certificate
because Romney's parents are also not of American birth.
Last election, I felt Romney was the better of the two or three, and I backed him. I had to hold my nose to vote for McCain and did, but I could not do it again.
I don't think he will run if we get a strong candidate list and not a big one like last time.
I hope we do that. But if we don't, and he runs, I'll back him again if I must.
Lie #1 by Diogenesis:
You defend Romney's support of Obama on Afganistan where he has increased the murders of Americans by preventing normal ROE.
Please quote where I did this.
You can't, because I didn't.
Lie #2 by Diogenesis:
You defend Romney's support of Obama on TARP and excessive spending when it has destroyed the country.
Please quote where I did this.
You can't, because I didn't.
Lie #3 by Diogenesis
You defend Romney's support of Obama on his union use when it has wrought violence against conservatives.
Man, you're making this too easy for me:
Please quote where I did this.
You can't, because I didn't.
Lie #4 by Diogenesis
You probably also defend Romney's support of Obama on his absence of a birth certificate because Romney's parents are also not of American birth.
You know, when you just lie about people like this, you reveal yourself to be someone without the intelligence to engage in honest discussion. When you lie because you don't have the intelligence to respond to what someone actually writes, you show a basic lack of integrity.
All because you knew you couldn't answer my simple, direct initial question, and had to...lie.
You lose. Game over. Liar.
Why dont you look in post #30 where you support Obama
on all those things.
Lie #5 by Diogenesis
But we can't have those discussions here. We're too busy making up BS lies because someone dares say that one ONE quote...
Man, this sucks.
Did Romney not send you an autographed photo or return your call or something?
We can both be reasonable.
So. I’ll talk to you later.
(If I’d wanted to hear a One note Samba I’d have clicked on the Mendez/Brasil 66 version on YouTube!)
Whatever, man, you’re not the oen being lied about by some weirdo with a fixation on a guy known for his hair.
What you are doing by extension, is damaging Palin and i hope one day you drop the DNC BS, get your head screwed on straight, and understand the politics of these campaign weasels.
They have got inside your head, tweaked your juvenile buttons and turned you into a DNC operative where you and others have nearly destroyed this forum.
Have a nice day.....
Agree. The fact that he is a low key conservative makes him an ideal candidate for RNC chair. We don’t need a camera hog in that role. A quiet leader who can raise money and mobilize the grassroots.
That is what makes Blackwell a good candidate. We don’t need an RNC chair that is a media hog. He needs to quietly raise money and organize grassroots.
No more “good speakers” please. Steele’s precise problem is that he opens his mouth in front of cameras.
I'm starting to warm up to my second choice, Lynn (or is it Lynne?() Cheney. She's smart as a whip and can handle herself in front of a camera. Yet I know it'll be someone out of left field who WANTS the job, not someone who'd be perfect for it.
Why do I have a feeling if Steele goes, he'll suddenly come out with a book or a startling interview where he says Republicans are all cracker racists or something? I just never had a good vibe about him from early on.
Fact: The McCain/Palin ticket was up ++4 to 10 pts. in some polls, days prior to the election.
So rather than helping the GOP, Romney and
TeamROMNEY decided …… to attack Gov. Palin to throw Election2008.
The Palmetto Scoop reported: "One of the first stories to hit the national airwaves was
the claim of a major internal strife between close McCain aides and the folks handling his running mate Sarah Palin."
"I’m told by very good sources that this was indeed the case and that a rift had developed, but it was between Palin’s people and the staffers brought on from the failed presidential campaign of former Gov. Mitt Romney, not McCain aides."
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romney’s former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
… aides loyal to Romney inside the McCain campaign, said The Scoop, reportedly saw
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.
Erick Erickson, who organized Operation Leper, said:
"These staffers are now out trying to finish her off ….hoping it would ingratiate themselves with Mitt Romney."
"Kathleen Parker: After Interviews, Palin Should Bow Out"
Staggering bigotry of Kathleen Parker - UPDATED"
Who benefits most from Sanford meltdown? Californian (that's right) Mitt Romney
"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"
"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"
"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"
"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"
"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"
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.
