Notice: Free Republic has been in full rebellion mode since 2008 and will remain so for the duration

Click here to pledge your support! ^ | April 11, 2012 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

Notice: Free Republic has been in full rebellion mode since 2008 and will remain in full rebellion mode for the duration!

No more Doles!! No more McCains!! No more RINOS!!

NO ROMNEY!!

Those who cannot stomach rebellion might as well start looking for a new home on the net!!

Those who have ignored my hundreds of posts on this crucial issue or who have doubted me these last three or four years might as well get used to it. FR will never support the abortionist, homosexualist, socialist, mandate loving, constitution trampling liar Mitt Romney.

In case you haven't noticed, a TEA Party rebellion is on and Free Republic signed on years ago. There is no turning back. No more crap from the GOP-e!! They've screwed us for the last time!! Karl Rove and Mitt Romney, et al, loathe conservatism and loathe the tea party and took it upon themselves to use their money and connections to destroy nearly every one of our conservative tea party candidates while pushing their big government RINOS. That makes them the enemy. I will not reward that betrayal by giving them my support or my vote.

FR is and will remain a pro-life, pro-limited government conservative site!!

We are beholden to NO ONE!! We bow to no kings!! We bow to NO RINOS!!

I'd rather fight and die like a man than bend over and be screwed by a RINO!! I refuse to kiss Karl Rove or Mitt Romney's rings!! They can kiss my rosy red ass instead!!

FUMR!! FUGOP!!

Long live the rebellion!!

Hope my message is clear.

[BornToBeAmerican]

What is your argument. I never said I KNOW WHAT EITHER WILL DO. zonly what they have done. ????

[Gluteus Maximus]

Inspiring. Count me in.

Actually, this has been my position since the RINO Bill Buckley kicked PJB out of the GOP nearly 20 years ago. It's been clear that electing RINOs is not in our interest since then. Don't know how any conservative could ever have supported Karl Rove's party in 2000 and 2004, or McCain's bid in 2008. It's really beyond me how so many of my conservative friends took all that abuse for so long, apparently in the name of some forlorn hope that the Trotskyite Neocons running the Party since Buckley showed his true colors would somehow morph into conservatives.

But, better late than never.

It's far, far better to lose the Presidential election this year to an open Socialist than to elect a Trotskyite poser with an "R" behind his name. We're actually not so bad on defense. Obamacare might well go down in flames, for example. We can play a strong defense for another term if that's what it takes to cleanse the GOP of the Trotskyites once and for all.

To paraphrase Chiang-kaishek, Liberals are a disease of the skin, Neocons are a disease of the heart.

First things first.

[PieterCasparzen]

If we have a conservative nominee would “be willing to” actually fix things, then we can confidently elect them and expect success.

I don’t share that confidence. As I have stated numerous times, our country is so far off the rails that any conservative we elected to cut entitlement spending even 10% would likely see congress change hands within two years and he/she would be slaughtered in four.

Look at Wisconsin.... a small cut to benefits and they shut down the capital for weeks. Realistically, what do you think will happen when they cut food stamps, welfare, social services, union contracts, pensions, medicaid, medicare, and social security?

I could support such a candidate, but our problems won’t be fixed in two, four, eight, or even sixteen years. We are looking at drastic cuts in government spending spread out over decades to get out of the hole we find ourselves in. Reagan could not do it and he was the finest communicator and most pursuasive President we have seen in my lifetime.

If such a "true conservative" President was a "nice guy" and not brash, on a Churchillian or even Cromwellian scale, I agree, they would be playing strictly by the rules and trying to convince Congress to give them what they want. Such a Mr. Nice Guy would simply tug on the reins a bit, but the horse would continue running headlong towards disaster.

IMHO, the Wisconsin Governor is one such Mr. Nice Guy. Great guy, but he's more of a Bradley than a Patton.

By "be willing to" I was meaning get political support going for drastic measures and then do them.

Why no political leaders have popped up yet who fit the bill for the Presidency is because a) they need real confidence in their vision b) they need to have the correct vision c) that vision includes several changes that have to happen simultaneously and d) a few industries would have a lot of change to deal with that, even though it would ultimately be healthy for the entire economy, they certainly would not suggest such ideas on their own.

Then...

Success convinces. The "visionary" would have to be simultaneously doing the changes and marketing them to the public like crazy, constantly pushing and pushing to gain support and action from supporters, in effect, steamrolling the opposition on all fronts. With how treasonous some of the Congress and the current administration is, I think we're a bit beyond worrying about keeping critics happy who will never be happy as long as they're not in power themselves. IMHO, I'd make it clear to Congress that I'm seeking their passage of the right legislation that I want, but I'm also going gangbusters with Executive orders to fix many, many wrongs. Basically, it's emergency time and they do not know what to do. If Congress is left to it's own devices, America will have a drastic economic collapse. All they keep doing is the will of lobbyists and polls; they don't have a wisp of a solution amongst the lot of them.

The size of the economy makes it more resilient than it seems at first glance. More important to my "vision" is that the enormous size of the U.S. economy also makes nominal GDP increases during a "boom" time yield more prosperity than would seem possible at first glance. If the Federal government actually dramatically slashed it's own size and put itself "back into it's own cage", along with the spending reductions which would enable it to realize surplus, it would also inspire people and business in America to earn, since the future taxation prospect would be lower taxes, not higher, in America. With a constant set tax rate, GDP increases would result in very large tax revenue, adding to surpluses that could be used to pay down the debt much faster than expected.

IMHO, income tax, even government's need for tax revenue at all, could be shrunk to levels that would seem incredibly cheap. But it will never happen as long as we have most of Congress bought and paid for by various industries who are looking only at their short term easy money ideas, and half of Congress bought and paid for by far leftism that seeks to run American into the ground.

[TigersEye]

All I said is that I would chose to vote for the less bad IF I HAD NO OTHER CHOICE rather than vote for the MOST BAD.

That is not all you said...

Sadly we just don’t know what Romney will do. We can’t say that with the black hearted muslim can we

[TigersEye]

I never said I KNOW WHAT EITHER WILL DO. zonly what they have done. ????

Yes, you did.

Sadly we just don’t know what Romney will do. We can’t say that with the black hearted muslim can we

[volunbeer]

You are correct and thank you for a well reasoned reply. What you suggest is possible, but it requires so many things to happen at once it would be extremely difficult. As long as the majority of Americans allow the corruption and dysfunctional government to continue we know how this will end.

The biggest impediment to necessary reform is the special interest you mention along with the entitlement crowd (and that includes state/local government). Our psychology as a nation has slowly shifted towards reliance on the national government and we are right where the progressives want us.

We are almost deadlocked 50/50 and the opposition party is so corrupted they continue to steer left, albeit a little slower than the progressives. All the DNC has to do is keep their base believing that you and I owe them something and they will win. There is more support for this poison among conservatives than you would believe.... just read a good social security thread on FR.

[RnMomof7]

What happened is one Mormon supporting another hoping to fulfill the White Horse prophecy

[whiterhino]

The your analogy assumes she might not marry one of the two you don’t approve of. That is not gonna happen. The USA will elect one of the two. So which one OF THE TWO would you prefer for the next 4 years? You can wish for some other option but it isn’t there.

[whiterhino]

Never said I loved a RINO, Jim. I said we have to pick the GOP over OBAMA. That is all... No other party or candidate has a chance in this cycle.

“Stay home and don’t cancel out an Obama vote if you want.” That is essentially what you are telling everyone and I think it is dangerous to our Republic to do so in these times.

BTW, I am so conservative that I, like MANY conservatives, voted for Perot over GHWB in ‘92 because he lied about raising taxes. Look what it got us... Clinton as president with only 48% of the vote. A lukewarm conservative reaction to McCain (I hate to even type the name), may of got us Obama, not sure, but it did help Obama.

[TigersEye]

The your analogy assumes she might not marry one of the two you don’t approve of. That is not gonna happen.

That is not true. Newt could still be the nominee.

The USA will elect one of the two. So which one OF THE TWO would you prefer for the next 4 years?

They are both evil so it doesn't matter that much. I would prefer that the GOP, since it is supposed to represent conservatism, was not lead by a far-left pathological liar.

You can wish for some other option but it isn’t there.

There are always other options. One is to not give support to either one. I have obligations to maintain that prevent me from supporting any evil much less one that sits in the POTUS chair.

Do what you think you have to do. Good luck.

[BornToBeAmerican]

touche

But if you take the black hearted muslim as his word then we can, can’t we. Umm, what was it he told President Putin to wait for?

Oh and his words paraphrased “Under my plans energy prices will necessarily skyrocket”

Unlike some, I do listen to what he say’s and I do believe him.

Do you honestly believe he has accomplshed everything he said he will do? Do you really believe that he has changed America the way he wants. Has he totally destroyed Capitalism? Not yet, but he denounces it everywhere he goes,

Do I know he WILL destroy it. Of course not! But I know he wants to. ‘Obama’s Pick for World Bank Hates Capitalism’ - Google that if you must

So quick playing your little word games.

[BornToBeAmerican]

touche

But if you take the black hearted muslim as his word then we can, can’t we. Umm, what was it he told President Putin to wait for?

Oh and his words paraphrased “Under my plans energy prices will necessarily skyrocket”

Unlike some, I do listen to what he say’s and I do believe him.

Do you honestly believe he has accomplshed everything he said he will do? Do you really believe that he has changed America the way he wants. Has he totally destroyed Capitalism? Not yet, but he denounces it everywhere he goes,

Do I know he WILL destroy it. Of course not! But I know he wants to. ‘Obama’s Pick for World Bank Hates Capitalism’ - Google that if you must

[TigersEye]

I can't take 0bama or Romney at their word. They are both pathological liars. Their records show them both to be far-left liberals. One thing I can say for 0bama; he won't be pretending to represent conservatism.

When he tries to institute his liberal policies people won't say to me "look at that that's what you voted for." Which is what some of my Democrat-voting friends did say to me when George Bush was instituting liberal policies like MediCare part D, No Child Left Behind and when he said he would sign the AWB.

[Loud Mime]

There you go again with the personal attacks. Grow up.

Let me go over my belief again: I find it invalid when a person of one FAITH says another FAITH is wrong. That has been my argument for some time. Got it? Arguing over the validity of any religion is an exercise in metaphysics; nothing can be proven. You and others miss this repeated argument, claiming that I am defending your spiritual enemies. What will it take for you to understand this? Huh? This reminds me of how the Nazis hated the Jews; nothing could lead them from their obsessive hatred. Go back to the issue of logic!

Gall? The tone was not set by me, and you followed it well. My compliments to your gall! The stuff I’m reading on this thread makes me sick. I never thought FR would sink into a pit of such hatred and hysteria.

Let me guess. You will not consider the hatred and hysteria issue, you’ll just tell me to leave; right? If so, my points have all been proven.

I’m Pro-God, Pro-USA, Pro-Constitution, Pro-life, Pro-Family and Pro-Liberty. I fit the requirements put up by JimRob himself. But I disagree with anything that helps Obama. People who care for this nation cannot agree that Obama should be removed - evil is at work.

[whiterhino]

Yes, I hope you are right about the outside chance Newt could get the nomination. It would be like one of those “last play wins the game” scenarios in sports. It does happen now and then.

[BornToBeAmerican]

Good point.

I should have stated: “I believe him when he says anything to the detriment of America.” Otherwise, not at all

[Graewoulf]

I like the idea of playing to the end of the echo of the whistle!

Since the recent past, (GWB minus $ 4 Trillion/8 years; Obama minus $ 5 Trillion / 3+ years), has been non-salvagable, does that not require that there must be a fundamental financial philosophy change in “both” political parties?

Either Obama or Obamalite would produce NO change that is financially salvageable.

Romney’s pal, Rep. Ryan, plans to hold onto our disastrous entitlements and magically balance the budget in 30 YEARS. No mention how he is going to pay off the 15 + Trillion Dollar dept.

Uprooting the GOP-Elites from their insanity, (”= doing the same things over and over again, and expecting different results” (Einstein)), is necessary to achieve a salvageable result.

GAME ON!

[libdestroyer]

Amen to that, Norm!

[so_real]

I simply do not agree that Mitt Romney can be characterized as a "liberal."

You might suffering from the Fox News characterization of Romney, then. He's about as "center-right" as Hillary Clinton. Issue for issue, and even by his own admission, Romney is a progressive. He is a better representative for the democrats than the republicans. (At least, that is, the republicans that purported to represent the conservative base.) The information is out there if you care to pursue it.

That strikes me as a mere sentiment--not serious analysis. For truly serious analysis, one might look to, say, the musings of Larry Sabato; Charlie Cook; Stu Rothenberg; Scott Rasmussen; or even Dick Morris.

Maybe you'll feel otherwise ... when he loses. Time will tell.

Frankly, I harbor no desire for a third party. In any case, your plan seems to require the sacrifice of the 2012 presidential election, in the (rather fatuous) hope that this sacrifice might help "build a contender for future elections." And this represents precisely the sort of Big Picture mindset that I find most unfortunate...

I harbor no such desire either. I want the republican party to represent its base instead of attempting to make the "new center" look like Romney or Hillary. The GOP has not sacrificed the 2012 election yet. But it does appear poised to do so. We'll wait to see what the convention brings. If the party leaves us ... we are left with two choices : 1) becomes socialists ourselves so that we still belong to the party, 2) or let it go and build a party that belongs to us. I'm not one to pee on the graves of our Founders; so #1 is a non-starter for me. Others will have to make that call for themselves.

I believe that those who see America in terms of constitutionalists versus anti-constitutionalists are missing the point. Quite badly. The real dichotomy, it seems to me, is between liberals and conservatives.

I try not to parse words to make wiggle room for wrong-minded points of view. I'm a "Constitutional conservative" and make no effort to marginalize either facet of the description.

[LibertarianInExile]

“and, at this time, the alternative is.......?”

Yeah, Jim, while I know you still seem to think Newt has a shot (and is a conservative, HA!), I’m betting the conservative-GOP-nominee ship has sailed already, so I’ll be looking forward to hearing you speak to that alternative AFTER the primaries are over. Remember, there will be a few other candidates out there to consider besides Rat and Rat-Lite. Better to vote third party and at least make my voice heard than let Romney and Obama think I supported either of them.