Posted on 01/09/2010 1:35:38 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Mitt Romney is no different than Harry Reid.
They both say they're against abortion but that it is a woman's constitutional right to choose (and that's settled law so the debate is over).
Both say it would be wrong to use government for moral issues but see no problem whatsoever in using government to force immoral issues on a moral people.
Both see government as a force to use FOR the good of the people, for example, forcing the people to purchase government approved insurance plans for their own good and if they refuse, penalize or jail them.
Both believe that government knows what's best for the peons.
Both believe that government should tax those who have for the benefit of those who don't.
Neither recognizes the concept that our nation was founded on the "self-evident truth" that our unalienable rights are a gift from God our Creator, not from man or government and that we should all be treated equally under the law.
Neither see the constitution as a limit on government power.
Neither has any respect whatsoever for our God-Given, unalienable rights or a history or demonstrable interest in defending the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic so help me God (including, obviously, themselves).
Either would RULE over us with an iron fist.
But of course, the same is true of Obama, Pelosi, Clinton and other assorted and misc Demoncrats and RINOs.
JMHO, of course.
If conservatives and Republicans follow through on and capitalize on the Tea Party movement and the growing opposition to Obama and the Dims, then, substantial Republican wins in the House and Senate will go far toward determining who the next Republican nominee will be. The candidates in the Republican primaries will have to align fairly closely with the issues of the voters and the Republican winners in the 2010 elections.
I think the next Republican nominee will be the one who will best align with the issues that will coalesce over the next year. The entire nation does not share the negative view of Romney. I think his Mormonism will still be the biggest question for many evangelicals, and he’ll have to dance around the health care issue, whatever the outcome of the final votes. Unless some newer face can really make a splash soon, I think it will be Palin or Romney. And both will be wise to align themselves with the most important issues that have risen to the top over the next year or so.
If the strength of the current movement away from Obama is as strong as it seems, then the movement will form a candidate or two more than any candidates will persuade the voters.
Both Mr. Romney and Mr. Reid are also bad on Second Amendment issues.
Romney is a lower than a worm and snakes (apologies to both).
He PATHETICALLY attempted to justify MA healthcare and pathetically tried to articulate its differences from nationalized obamacare, completely missing the point, that GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I muted the remainder of the interview...lol.
I couldn’t find one thing to disagree with.
What a great picture!
Yes! It’s my favorite. Please save it and use it often!!!
Those are your views, but it will be the views of voters all across the nation that determine the next Republican nominee. And all those sins committed in Massachusetts will never be known to most voters, and many voters will not consider them to be as important as others do.
I notice Pawlenty is out there sounding conservative and “clarifying” some of his past views and positions on the issues. Too much division can serve up that guy, just as 2008 served up Juan McCain. Blue states can pick the Republican nominee, and I think they’d prefer Pawlenty to Palin or Romney.
We need a candidate who can align him or herself with the issues the current movement will consider most important. And, one heck of a lot about the direction of conservatism and the Republican party will be determined in November. Then a presidential nominee must join in and lead it further along in 2011 and beyond.
I still like Palin or Romney as having the best chances of retiring Obama after one term.
Well I am no Romney fan but there is the matter of degree so I don’t accept broad brush statements like that. Sorry.
“Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering whale; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee. Sink all coffins and all hearses to one common pool! and since neither can be mine, let me then tow to pieces, while still chasing thee, though tied to thee, thou damned whale! Thus, I give up the spear!”
- Moby Dick, Herman Melville
Your Master, Mitt Romney, threw Election2008 to Obama.
That is working out for you, right?
The McCain/Palin ticket was up ++8 to 10 pts. in some polls, days prior to the election.
So rather than helping the GOP, poor loser “I am Myth” Romney and
TeamROMNEY decided …… to attack Gov. Palin (and her defenseless children) 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."
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?"
Romney was a piss-poor Governor. Romney got a "C" rating from CATO. And that was BEFORE
Romney's Socialized medicine and coverup of the BIGdig kicked in. So you RomneyBOTs try to "spin history".
Note also that Romney also betrayed President Bush as Governor
(predicting what TeamROMNEY would do later in Election2008 to Gov. Palin, and then the GOP - i.e. Spoiler Romney-backstabbing),
because Romney was also against the conservative tax cuts. Here are the facts from CATO.
"As U.S. real output grew 13 percent between 2002 and 2006, Massachusetts trailed at 9 percent.
* Manufacturing employment fell 7 percent nationwide those years, but sank 14 percent under Romney, placing Massachusetts 48th among the states.
* Between fall 2003 and autumn 2006, U.S. job growth averaged 5.4 percent, nearly three times Massachusetts' anemic 1.9 percent pace.
* While 8 million Americans over age 16 found work between 2002 and 2006, the number of employed Massachusetts residents actually declined by 8,500 during those years.
"Massachusetts was the only state to have failed to post any gain in its pool of employed residents," professors Sum and McLaughlin concluded.
In an April 2003 meeting with the Massachusetts congressional delegation in Washington, Romney failed to endorse President Bush's $726 billion tax-cut proposal."
[Cato Institute annual Fiscal Policy Report Card - America's Governors, 2004.]
I agree! As a former 45 yr resident of Nevada, I have dealt personally with Harry Reid. Step carefully when painting with a broad brush. People may disagree with Mitt’s politicals or his religion but there is NO comparison with the snake and dirty antics that Harry Reid has done over the years, long before he became majority leader. No comparison. It would be more productive to concentrate on who can stop the re-election of Obama. A reminder to many critics that Ronald Reagan had a change of heart on issues during his career. I doubt if he could pass the litmus test that so many here demand. Reagan understood the art of political compromise. I am not a Mitt follower, just want conservatives and/or Republicans to pull together and stop Obama from having a second term!
Bravo and a standing ovation. Agree with every thing you wrote.
That’s the first time (in several decades) that I’ve seen Sourpuss Harry Weed smiling.
Yeah, I know. Our baby killing abortionists are better than their baby killing abortionists and our big government forced healthcare plan is better than their big government forced healthcare plan. After all, we are Republicans.
What do you mean by "matter of degree"?
Do you mean that Myth has actually succeeded in imposing socialized medicine, while Reid hasn't?
I’m not spinning anything. I mostly ignore what Romney did in ultra-lib Massachusetts and decide how I think he would govern as president. There is always some amount to ignore when any candidate moves from state to national campaigns.
And I’ll have to ignore Sarah’s recent statements of how much she admires McCain, and how she hopes he wins reelection. So, does she plan to campaign for him? She said she’d campaign for those who most share her values. So, what if JD Hayworth challenges McCain, as every half-conservative person hopes he will? Will Sarah still support McCain? Will she go to Arizona and campaign for Juan against JD? Who’s the real conservative, Juan or JD? And, I’m sure the MSM will use this to damage Sarah any way they can, but will she pull back and avoid a potentially very demoralizing move on her part?
If I could have it exactly as I’d like, Sarah would do all the right things and win he nomination and the presidency in 2012. But she hasn’t even declared, and there is no guarantee that she will for 2012.
There are no pure as the driven snow politicians. If Sarah doesn’t make it this time, I’ll be pulling for Mitt because of how I believe he’d govern as president, not because of anything he did or didn’t do in Massachusetts. And a Republican Congress would determine a lot.
And, the importance or lack thereof of what Romney did or didn’t do as Governor of Massacusetts are definitely your views, and not facts.
And, everyone knows who you are against. Who are you for? What if Sarah doesn’t decide to run in 2012?
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.