Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Norm Lenhart

re: “By all means, explain finally how it is that electing a pro gay, abortion funding, healthcare/amnesty pushing liberal instead of a a pro gay, abortion funding, healthcare/amnesty pushing liberal benefits America. In detail. Without excuses.”

You see, you equate Romney with Obama. You equate them as being exactly the same not only in political ideology, but also in degree of commitment to issues you listed. I think that’s an unsound analysis.

Yes, the republican choice sucked, and yes, Romney had some problems in the four areas you mentioned, but you think Romney was as much pro-abortion as Obama (who supported post-birth abortion)?? You think Romney would have pushed the gay agenda, obamacare and amnesty to the same reckless, whole-hearted degree as Obama??

Maybe another question would be: Explain how voting for Romney would have put the country in the same exact or worse position it is now economically, militarily, in our foreign policy, and yes, even morally under B. Obama?

By degree, which candidate demonstrated more respect for our economy, foreign policy, our military readiness, our Constitution and self-government? Romney or Obama?

Voting always involves voting for more good and less evil. One of the two candidates is going to be, by degree closer to what you believe than the other one. Sometimes the better candidate is only 40% or 50% of what you want or 60% of what you want, while the other one is 0 to 2% of what you want.

Which one do you vote for? It’s a no-brainer.

For your question to be valid, as I said previously, you would have to believe that Romney and Obama are EXACTLY the same in belief and degree of commitment to the gay agenda, abortion, socialized medicine, and amnesty.

If you actually believe that then no answer will satisfy you.

My greater concern now is how the republican party seems completely whipped since the election. Excepting for a few republicans who have spoken out, the majority have acted with no backbone at all. It’s as though they think it’s over. Why fight it? Thus, they have not, except on a rare occasion or two, acted as an opposition party.

I think part of the reason is because of the loss of the presidency in 2012. I think everyone thought Obama was going to lose and lose big. He should have. But, Obama’s people (alive and dead, legal and illegal) showed up big time to vote and conservatives didn’t. Now. Here we are.

Are we better off or worse?


20 posted on 08/17/2013 6:59:56 AM PDT by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: rusty schucklefurd

“You think Romney would have pushed the gay agenda, obamacare and amnesty to the same reckless, whole-hearted degree as Obama??”

The man who said he would be ftter for the homos than Ted Kennedy? The man who had illegals working at his house and only ditched them because he got caught?

Yup.

And that complete and total idiocy is why the rest of his record mirrors Obama.

When you compare the two, Romneys was far worse than Obama’s before Zero ascended. That’s a died in wool/carved in stone fact. So if every other example in history is anything to go by, he would have been just as bad, perhaps in different ways. But if that’s all you got to hang your hat on, it just proves them mess this is.

Voting for evil gets more of it. Period.


21 posted on 08/17/2013 7:12:23 AM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson