Posted on 12/25/2007 5:33:32 PM PST by Mobile Vulgus
He lied about having the endorsement of the NRA. That was this month.
Yes he did!
Now I would prefer to see Fred Thompson the nominee. But IMNHO, the odds are NOBODY is going to win the nomination in the primaries. The most likely scenario is that it will end up with Rudy, Mitt, Huck, Fred and McCain each having between 10-30% of the delegates going into the convention. If these vitriolic attacks keep up nominating a candidate and uniting the party behind him will be impossible. I think it would behoove the candidates and their supporters to promote their own beliefs and agenda positively, and quit the pointless smearing of other candidates.
When someone is a "Republican in Name Only," they don't deserve that kind of respect, as they are no kind of "fellow" except to the other registered Republicans who are at heart and policy anything but.
It would be refreshing to see an attack on Romney that references something newer than 1994, but one hardly ever does.And WHY is that do you think? It's because he has NO RECORD of political interest before that!!! He went from spending MOST of his life uninterested in politics, then was a liberal for most of his political life, and the last year he has SUDDENLY "become: a conservative. His record is HORRIBLE!
Well said!
I think Romeny is a turd of a candidate, but this post could only come from a Huckabee supporter.
Sorry. Wrong again. I do not support Huck. In fact, I think Huck is WORSE than Romney!
If he is the nominee I’ll vote for Romney.
This is soooooo typical. I agree with this post, and I'm neither a Huckabee NOR a Thompson supporter.
What is it with you people who support Romney? The facts getting in your way or something?
*shaking head in disbelief*
I am having a tough time coming to that conclusion. I am not sure I can vote for Romney no matter what!
“The so-called 11th Commandment has served the Republican Party well over the years. Ronald Reagan is often given credit for coming up with the rule, but in fact, it was someone else’s idea — someone named Gaylord Parkinson, who years ago was chairman of the Republican Party in California. In September 1965, as California Republicans (including Reagan) prepared to compete for the GOP nomination for governor, Parkinson decreed that the candidates should refrain from attacking each other. He called it the 11th Commandment: “Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.” The idea was to foster party unity and avoid the acrimony of the year before, when moderate and conservative Republicans were bitterly divided over their presidential nominee, Barry Goldwater.”
http://dailynightly.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/10/17/416583.aspx
Hmmm....it seems from the polls that the vast majorities of Replican voters seem to be supporing one or another “RINO” rather than Thompson, Duncan Hunter, etc. So if the majority of Republicans are RINOs, what exactly is a “real Republican?”
The vast majority of people are being spoon fed by the liberal mainstream media....and you wonder why the vast majority of the population, who do not read up or concern themselves with actual policies and shifts are becoming RINOS?
Puhleaze.
I'm no Romneybot, but that's a pretty bold and inaccurate statements considering:
A little more on Reagan and Ford...
“Campaigning in Florida that March, Ronald Reagan broke the 11th Commandment and attacked Gerald Ford. He accused Ford, who had then been president just 19 months, of presiding over “the collapse of American will and the retreat of American power,” and said Ford “must be held accountable to history for allowing this to happen.” He said Ford lacked “vision,” that he found it “difficult” to trust his leadership. He accused the president of favoring “pre-emptive concessions” in talks with the Soviet Union, and said, “I fear for my country when I see White House indifference to the decline in our military position.””
Not exactly calling him a ‘liar’, but an attack none the less.
I’m still putting my effort and money into Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson. Both on the same ticket would simplify things for me. They are the only conservatives running.
There is a real fear this year by people who feel they were burned in 2006 and are deathly afraid of another Clinton in the Whitehouse.
It’s almost to the point of hysteria where some people are willing to sacrifice some of their principals just to make sure that we don’t end up with another Democrat President.
It’s sad that Conservatism seems to be dying.
A shame..A real shame.
I did check it.
The paper that published it, linked to the story and thread was from Utah.
Editorial offices 30 E 100 South P.O. Box 1257 Salt Lake City, UT 84110
So that fact remains that Myth Romney was completely knocked down (ie. did not receive the usual PUFF piece)
by BOTH his home state (Mass, Utah, NH) newspapers.
What is your point?
As I said, Reagan attacked the current policies of his oppenents. He didn’t accuse them of lying when they agreed with him, based on positions they held over a decade before. As I recall George H.W. Bush changed his position on abortion only after Reagan picked him for VP, but he held it staunchly ever since.
I’m not crazy about any of these guys, but one of them will almost certainly be the nominee. Engaging in personal attacks will only help Hillary, Obama or Edwards in the long run. I would rather have a half-hearted ally in the presidency than a determined enemy.
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.