Posted on 02/01/2012 6:55:12 AM PST by C19fan
Romney is more destructive to American conservatism, and values than Obama.
Mitt is professionally trained to destroy us while looking like us, sounding like us, mimicking us, using our own words, and now he is succeeding in becoming the leader of the right in America.
Romney won’t be the enemy from the Democrat party, he will be the Republican President of the united States, the leader of the Republican party.
You know what the right, and our writers, and our radio hosts will have to do to convince the Christian right to vote for a Mormon Bishop, they will have to find the creative language and reasoning, to overcome Christian faith, and knowledge of truth, regarding Mormonism.
The RDS is so bad that people are willing to stay home if he's the nominee. As bad as he is, he's not the radical communist obama is. I shudder to think what obama will do with four more years.
The establishment and the Senate GOP endorsement of the Independent, cost the Republican party a conservative Senate seat in Alaska.
The Romney wing of the GOP was willing to pay that price to stop the tea party, and Palin.
“Do we really want Oboma to nominate 2 new Supreme Court Justices?”
No I don’t, but that’s not enough to get me to vote for Romney.
The courts have done damage to the country, yes.
But not as much as the other two branches put together.
It takes a long time for stuff to go through the courts.
Not so long as to pass something like obamacare.
So I put the same question to you, are you willing to have RINOs nominate judges?
To me, any hope we have of saving the country is to have the republican party fade to nothingness as it’s replaced w/something more akin to the TEA party.
That is more important in the long run, than the short run hope of some judges.
Besides, I’m hoping that a new, more TEA party oriented senate will deal w/the confirmations.
Voting for Romney is, at best, short term solution to a long term problem. But it will only get worse in the long run if we don’t change this approach to voting.
So what is your point? That Newt is a progressive so lets all back the pandering fraud from Mass?
Newt was not my first, second or third choice but he is 1000 times better then Romney. But it is really not about Romney anyways, is it? It is about whether the Tea Party / Conservative movement was nothing more then a Republican cheerleading fest for a party or a movement driven by ideas and principles.
Understand that having Romney at the top of the ticket spells the end to the Tea Party and any momentum the Conservative movement made. We simply can not elect this liberal “blue blood” and claim we are about principles not power/party. For the last year the Tea Party has been tarnished as a movment of racist ignorant hillbillies, and never once did I see an establishment type stand up and take one for the cause. There is a reason for that ... they think the movement is about nothing more then ignorant hillbillies who are too stupid to make up their own minds and do what they are told.
So I don’t know about the rest of you folks but I am about principles not party. I’ve held my nose before, but not this time. Our country is imploding under the weight of tremendous debt started under a Republican, not Democrat, adminstration. It was a Republican Sec of Treasury who pushed for tarp, abandoning the free market principles I thought “our party” stood for. It was a Republican president who pushed through a significant unfunded extension to Medicare and a Republican Congress that approved it. And it was a Republican Governor who signed into law the blue print for what we now call ObamaCare, the same Governor we now want to nominate to lead “our party”.
So for all you folks thinking its time to suck it up and vote for “our nominee” have at it. Just understand that what we are throwing away is not about a single candidate or cause. It is about the long term viability of a nation in serious moral and financial decline. Understand the significance of the moment and the message a vote for Romney sends. Then do as your conscious dictates.
As for me, I will eat my children before I’d cast a vote for the pandering fraud from Mass. I will not stay home, but I will not vote for that. I will work dilligently to elect our candidates at the local, state and federal level. I may not make a damn bit of difference but I’ll at least know I did my all.
Get real. Boner won't fight anybody.
I will not vote for Romney EVER.
I will opt for 3rd party (if I like him)
Or I simply will not VOTE for a president.
“Get real”
So you think Pelosi made it harder for Obama?
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL I VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY OR ANYONE WHO ENDORSES ROMNEY BEFORE HE SECURES THE NOMINATION.
A Life-Long Republican.
I'll vote for someone who endorses Romney because he's the party's nominee but not someone who endorses Romney while he can still be stopped. I recognize this action as a "holding my nose while voting" type of endorsement.
As a friend of mine says DON'T BE ON MY SIDE!
I can only assume one of two things are happening
A. you're blowing off steam
B. you're dumber than dirt
I can only hope it is the former
I don't support Romney, I don't think he's the best candidate out there...that would be Newt Gingrich, warts and all. But IF Romney is the candidate of the GOP, I will skip to my polling station with a smile on my lips, a song in my heart, and gladly happily with great vigor pull the lever for him. Because in comparison to Barack Obama, Mitt Romney (even with all the problems I have with him) is an answer to a maidens prayer.
So Grow Up!
I will not vote for Romney and get 8 years of misery.
I will not, under any circumstances, vote for the GOP-e forced candidate, Mitt Romney.
If need be, I will watch our country burn to the f-ing ground. Perhaps then, we can rebuild.
The GOP-e is counting on all of us to fall in line like good little sheep.
I absolutely hate to find myself having to take this position, but if Romney gets the nomination (God forbid), that is the only position that I can take.
These are not easy times, and they will likely get far worse before anything gets better, if ever.
I am now convinced, more than ever, that the GOP-e must be completely destroyed and voting for Romney will extend its life.
If Obama wins, our country is destroyed. If the GOP-e wins, our country is destroyed. This sure isn’t like trying to choose an ice cream flavor.
Having said all of that, I continue to believe that with our help, Newt will win this.
I will not vote for Romney, period.
GO NEWT GO—it’s about the survival of our country!!
Mitt is no answer to any prayer. Get over yourself!
AMEN, we are at WAR and I would rather go down fighting than surrender with no attempt to stop them.
It’s hard to be in a political party the thinks it would do better without it’s base. I really believe the RINO’s would be better just courting blue dogs democrats and ditching conservatives.
Mitt out advertised Gingrich 65-1 on Florida TV. Romney was killed in the debate by Santorum and yet, he still won.
Romney won because he won the stupid vote, the people who base their opinions on TV ads.
Romney is not going to be able to do that against Obama.
Anyone but Romney, ok by me.
“So Grow Up!”
The pragmatists, voting for Romney, are only thinking tactically about the short-term.
The principled, not voting for Romney, are thinking strategically about the long term.
Sort of like it would’ve been better not to do TARP, experience the pain, and come out better off in the end, instead of dragging things on for a decade or more, like in the depression.
Children don’t have the capability of thinking strategically. They would stay up late on a school night, if you let them, not thinking about how tired they will be the next day.
So perhaps it’s the pragmatists here that need to do the growing up!
We feel your pain. I agree, Newt wud be the best candidate. He displays the true core values of the Republican grass roots. If only their were some way we could ensure Newt becomes the nominee. He has a SuperPAC, no? Maybe we could drop a few bucks. I’d give all I could to stop that Massachusetts liberal, silver-spoon.
Go Shooting. It’s great stress relief. It focuses the mind. And it shows Romney – and Obama – that you can’t whiz on the Second Amendment. It’s a threefer.
It's a one-fer. It's great stress relief. The fact that it is likely to influence neither man is precisely the problem here. Romney's gun-control antecedents are very well-known and his new-found respect for the Second Amendment reeks of insincerity and posturing. "Go shooting, little people, and pretend that you count for something" is the sort of advice you'd give a ten-year-old.
Mitch doesn't get it. What is significant about conservatives within the Republican party is that we feel, and are, profoundly marginalized, disempowered, taken for granted. Government spending must be cut, the size of government must be trimmed, the direction of centralization of government power, with all its concomitant waste and corruption, must be reversed. Any candidate not committed to that might as well be a Democrat as far as conservatives are concerned. And "committed" includes a track record of success in that arena which Mitt Romney does not possess.
What Berg's blithe reassurance amounts to is "relax, you've lost, now vote for Romney because the other guy is worse." Over and above the fact that the primaries have barely begun, there is in this the entirely false assertion that so long as we "show up", that is, vote for Romney, we can somehow magically influence him to favor our policies. How Berg draws that conclusion is a bit of a mystery to me. "Vote for Mitt because the other guy is worse" argues exactly the opposite.
I do agree that staying home on election day is an action likely to make conservative marginalization worse. We must attain a majority in the Legislative. The Executive under Romney is likely to be a rubber stamp for liberal activism if the experience in Massachusetts is any guide. But Gingrich or even Reagan under a Democratic legislature is not likely to be a great deal of improvement. The Legislative is a battle the country cannot afford to lose. We cannot stay at home on election day.
That doesn't mean an automatic vote for any Presidential candidate, and Romney is perhaps the least likely of any of the remaining ones (except maybe for Ron Paul) to enjoy a free ride in that regard. I would far rather have a conservative - not Republican - Congress and a Democratic President than a Democratic Congress and a Republican - not conservative - President. A Democratic Congress and President together is too horrible to contemplate - the damage done by that combination between 2008 and 2010 is likely to take decades to undo and it may be permanent.
So I'll pass on Mitch Berg's head-patting, thanks. What he's hearing isn't a tantrum, it's a roar of anger, and it isn't going to go away.
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.