I would characterize Romney as right-of-center on the political spectrum. Thus he is NOT a man of the Left. Neither is he as conservative as I am, or you are. His preferred governing style is consensus-building as the most efficacious way to get things done. I believe he sees politics as the art of the possible, not as the art of constructing a doctrinally preferred "perfect world." (Which I suspect is what you and your group of like-minded Romney detractors is seeking.)
In short, he is a political realist, not any kind of ideologist.
Plus he is a man who extends genuine kindness and respect toward others, which you are absolutely blind to. I consider him to be a good man, a man of upright character. I don't think he is a serial liar; I think you take his statements out of context, thus to justify calling him a liar. I simply do not recognize the person you describe as the real Mitt Romney.
So of course I do not consider him "dangerous." What we have in the Oval Office now IS dangerous. Terribly, fearsomely dangerous. And I worry that, thanks to people like you, that man will be re-elected to a second term as President of the United States.
FWIW.
WOW! Very true and well stated.
You don’t consider him ‘dangerous’ because you have no problem with the country continuing down the path it is on. That is, more and more control over us from the nascent global government.
We have been presented with a non-choice as a candidate for the election. This is in keeping with the philosophy that there are ‘political elites’ and the MSM uses that term all the time because the public relations campaign to make America step away from freedom and to become completely ‘interdependent’ with the rest of the world. This goal has almost been achieved. We have changed from a ‘classless’ society to one with a ‘political class’ and ‘working class’ and an ‘unemployed class’. Sound like communism, doesn’t it?
‘Consensus building’ is a communist tool in the globalist playbook. It hurts individual rights because it creates policy based on group think, and peer pressure to get people to change their values or opinions. The homosexual agenda has made strides in our society through consensus building. Agenda 21 is entrenched in local governments through consensus building. In this technique ideas of right, wrong and morality are pushed out of the political process because they have no place in consensus.
This man is not opposing any of Obama’s policies. He’s not a marxist, but he answers to the same masters Obama does and it is not the loyal American citizen. Net result, is the global corporatist agenda will be furthered no matter which one is elected.
I wrote a lengthy reply that was eaten by the server troll that’s bothering FR right now.
If it shows up in the future, then you’ll find it enjoyable.
I don’t see how anyone can find Romney to be anything but a liberal. Proof: within the last month he came out in support of “gay adoption by gay couples”. He slightly back-pedaled when he decided states could violate nature and force this cultural debilitator on us but not the fed.
What kind of “gay couple” would be “adopting” kids, Sister Betty? How is that not entirely a violation of nature, an affront to Nature’s God, and a sign of great confusion?
FWIW, people like me are called principled conservatives.
I wrote a lengthy reply that was eaten by the server troll that was bothering FR yesterday. If it shows up in the future, then you'll find it enjoyable.
I don't see how anyone can find Romney to be anything but a liberal. Proof: within the last month he came out in support of “gay adoption by gay couples”. He slightly back-pedaled when he decided states could violate nature and force this cultural debilitator on us but not the fed.
What kind of “gay couple” would be “adopting” kids, Sister Betty? How is that not entirely a violation of nature, an affront to Nature's God, and a sign of great confusion? He might have tried a two-step with the "gay adoption" back-pedal, but he let "gay couple" remain without correction.
What is a "gay couple"?
I know you are not LDS, and therefore, your analysis should carry even more weight, particularly by those who chief motivation is this man's religion.
I am LDS, and from a distance I would have called Romney a moderate and one who leans towards being liberal. But I did not live under his governance, and make my own judgements based on the totality of his words and my impressions as opposed to my experience living under his term as a governor.
As a result, I am forced, as a result of my own knowledge and respet of you, to modify my own impressions of the man and even have greater hope for our beloved Republic.
As I have stated myself, I already intended to support him against the Kenyan Marxist currently rsiding in the White House. Now I will be able to do so with even more convistion egarding his own potential as opposed to mostly doing so in order to defeat Obama.
God's speed and His blessings to you and yours.
Good post at #39. I also believe Romney is a good and decent man. He deserves our support in his effort to bring down one of the biggest threats that this great nation has ever faced.