Posted on 02/23/2012 4:42:36 AM PST by darrellmaurina
SHELBY, Mich. — Mitt Romney wants to talk about the economy — badly. It’s his longed-for comfort zone. It’s his standard stump speech. It’s the issue that has consumed his campaign.
The Republicans voters at a town hall here? Not so much.
During a campaign event on Tuesday, they bombarded Mr. Romney with questions about how he would protect religious liberty against government intrusion; about the depth of his commitment to fighting to abortion; about whether he would appoint strict constructionist judges to the Supreme Court; and about what kind of vice presidential nominee he would name.
It was a vivid reminder of the degree to which an intense new round of Republican primaries starting next week may turn not on Mr. Romney’s favored political battleground — how to turn around the country’s finances — but on much trickier terrain that has repeatedly frustrated his political plans this year: his ideological commitment as a conservative.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Ping for Santorum people.
ba ba but the Tea Party is dead.
Brokered convention instead of Romney...I nominate Rush...could that even happen? Rush show up and win it? Imagine the libtards reaction!!!
A social conservative will be a fiscal conservative. I’m not sure the same can be said in reverse. Besides, Romney isn’t the fiscal conservative he claims to be.
Romney sounded good because it is easy to sound strong against a weakling, and Santorum is weak in many respects. Besides, Romney is a natural at diverting attention from his own shortcomings and focusing on someone else’s. (Insofar as he’s a natural anything!)
What surprised me was how unprepared Santorum was, and how shaky.
In Michigan it will be Santorum or Romney so I’m voting for Santorum despite the media narrative.
Romney once again proved himself to be the most pretentious candidate.
anyone but romney!!
and we michiganders don’t “question” his conservatisim.. we flat out expose it as a lie!
“A social conservative will be a fiscal conservative.”
I’m going to take a stab at that because I’m just now beginning to look a little further into things that sometimes seem simply put but may in fact not be so simple.
A social conservative will be a fiscal conservative-
Because social conservatism would tend to enhance the economic freedom of private business and investment sectors?...
...and that under those conditions, it enhances the economic freedoms of everything and everyone else with the potential for real progress?...
That social conservatism enables the potential for progress through emerging economic freedoms brought about by an established fiscal conservatism?
I’ve seen what liberalism can do. Michigan was supposed to become a kind of “Hollywood Jr.” of the film industry but it never really happened. They made it look like it was happening but it ain’t gonna happen. The potential was never really there but liberals believed it was.
What Michigan needs is for liberalism to started getting used to the idea of being rejected.
Rick Snyder is a good example of a fiscal “conservative”.
His fiscal “conservatism” has no moral basis and is steadily sliding to the left.
-—. He hit the ball over the fence with the infanticide remark.-—
He publicly accused the sitting president of supporting infanticide, and his accusation has merited no headlines or even discussion among the LSM.
If nothing else, this shows how blackhearted they are.
Nothing is beneath them, so nothing they do should surprise us.
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.