Replies

Yes, you are continuing to walk with the fallen angels.

We are ALL sinners, having fallen short of the Glory of God.

Your “reason” why Rumney shouldn’t pick success appears to assume that his IQ is down there with you and Obama.

Do you ever really read or listen to what you type before you post? Listen carefully: Mitt-Witt is NOT going to have certain individuals speaking at what will be his coronation, for example: you think Newt Gingrich is going to be given an opportunity? Or Rick Perry? (especially after calling for Romney to release more tax returns?) He is going to prefer those who have strongly SUPPORTED him, not those who have lobbed one or more grenades at him and made his primary campaign more difficult. Likewise, he is not going to show a preference with those holding political ideologies that are diametrically opposed to his own.

But let's play some more:

First widdle 'editor', edit this sentence:

Sarah Palin has ____ number of things in common with Mitt Romney.

(your answer should be zero or close to zero, kinda where your reasoning abilities are)

Second, is Romney a conservative?
(this is a 'gimme' for ya, the answer is NO)

Third, is Sarah Palin a conservative?
(again, another 'gimme' for ya, the answer is obviously YES)

Palin would give him what he needs and lacks. Avoiding her will just about guarantee his failure, and I remain confidant that he is aware of that.

And upon what do you base that 'confidence'. Are you personal friends with Romney? Do you consult daily with his campaign staff? (Answer = NO)

This is classic conservative vs liberal/RINO territory, and ponder this hypothetical question: IF Sarah Palin were headed to the convention as the leader in delegates, her nomination was all but assured, do YOU think that she would be seeking the likes of Romney, or McCain, or some other liberal asswipe to speak at HER convention at the launching of HER campaign in the general election?

The answer is more than likely to be a solid Hell No!

You are clearly a one-dimensional thinker. You are unable to think outside the box, inside the box, or even how to FIND the damn box.

The rest of your agitprop has to be assumed to be junk filler material.

To someone with a room temperature IQ like yours, I can understand your failure to grasp anything more complicated than the contents of a Chinese fortune cookie.

RE :” Listen carefully: Mitt-Witt is NOT going to have certain individuals speaking at what will be his coronation, for example” (MarkJ to E-S)

It's perfectly logical that those Republicans who won delegates and those who endorsed Romney (mostly RINOs) in the primary are logically going to get the prime speaker spots at the convention, like them or not. The idea that a certain FNC paid $$$ ‘political commentator’WHO REFUSED TO RUN is going to be asked just because a few psycho's here still have wet dreams of her is ridiculous. They need to stop the whining and get a life.

Their cu-pie doll refused to run as a Republican in spite of their endless pathetic pleas to her for 3 years, and she wont run as third party against Romney regardless of all their pathetic whining on this thread subject. She is still a highly paid $$$$ ‘political commentator’. These idiots STILL don't understand what that means,

The Palinista cult ranks have dwindled to a tiny fraction of what they started with (bullies are only ‘brave’ with superior force), The remaining few aggressive Palinista (losers) on this thread who have not got that clue NOT project a huge sense of weakness with their lame attacks because of that.

BTW : Glad to see that you are all still here.