The Way to Win at Their Game isn't to play it.
Posted on 01/11/2014 10:13:11 AM PST by Drew68
I watched it in ‘12 - the election is over, chump. Your attempt to interpret it is voided as you are simply not equipped of understanding anything conservative - and your liberal attempt to rewrite history fails. Here is what it is about. Item number one of Newt Gingrich’s 21st Century Contract With America is to repeal Obamacare and pass a replacement that saves lives and money by empowering patients and doctors, not bureaucrats and politicians.
See all 10 legislative proposals....
Stick w/grandfather romneycare and it’s son obamacare - it’s your speed. You’ll get an apology when you step off your ‘known liberal platform’ which will never happen for it’s all you know.
What’s in order is you to get a hobby or pick your nose while on your free phone talking to yourself as no one is interested in your dribble.
I see that truth is not something you value. You accused me of lying. I proved that every word of what I said was true. And your admission that you knew it to be true back in 2012 shows that you knew beforehand that your accusation against me was false. I guess that makes you the liar, eh?
. . . that INCLUDES 300 PAGES OF OBAMACARE! Noot is on the video saying exactly that as he lays out his 21st Century Contract. And you are OK with that? Really?
To hell with that. Government needs to get the hell out of healthcare altogether. And I'll be damned if I am going to allow some FDR-loving federal-mandate supporting progressive POS like Noot Gingrich have any say in enacting any of that on me.
Then why did you vote for Romney? and hell bent against Newt like Romney was. Give it up - election is over and NEWT did not want the gov't in it. He is a clear Constitution man. Something you refuse to 'get'. David Barton will attest to that and he wanted Newt to run in '08.
So give it up - I'm not interested in your lack of knowledge about something that is long over. Ping someone else who will listen to your rant.
Please tell me he’s not considering running again. Same goes for Gomer Huckleberry and Michele.
Maybe, but that's what government is nowadays and how politics is played. Obama announces some "poverty program." It may or may not do anything. It may just be smoke and mirrors. Or counterproductive. But it doesn't matter. Republicans like Marco Rubio have to put their own plan on the table or be accused of not "caring." That's how it works nowadays.
Like I said, your vote's not on the table. Republicans have to go for the votes that are up for grabs, and some of those people are the ones who are impressed by "programs." Politicians -- Santorum, Rubio -- internalize that. Thinking in terms of programs or plans or policy packages becomes a part of their make up. And not voting only throws the election in the Democrats' lap, so that's not much of an option either.
I am an independent conservative and I refuse to vote for Republicans like that.
If they want that they should switch parties, otherwise both parties are starting to blend together. Actually it started long ago and they are not going to get a lot of conservative votes the way they are going.
Not voting for either big government leftist wing of the Uniparty is a perfectly fine thing, saves souls even.
Both parties can go off and die somewhere as far as I am concerned.
What you said.
The Way to Win at Their Game isn't to play it.
BUMP
I agree.
We need to stop playing the Unipartys’ game
There is a third option that has been demonstrated as being effective in hindering leftward motion, though, curiously, many conservatives instantly see red and become vehemently hostile when it's revealed. But it is the way I now vote because to not vote, to squander a franchise paid in blood, is ... to me, wrong, as wrong as voting for leftism and bigger government. I have a responsibility to vote, and so I do vote to WIN in the fight to weaken statism and leftism in both the Rep and Dem parties.
I don't think, "What would happen if we lose?" That's a swirling sink to the sewer. Looking at what would happen if we win with a Republican every bit as on-board philosophically with nationalized health care, environmentalism, the gay agenda, welfare (forced charity that ends up enabling bad habits and bad values), civil rights, minimum wage, the 2nd amendment -- if we won .. what would happen? I think about that because in the end, what we vote FOR is the only thing that counts.
And I vote accordingly. It wasn't for Romney, and it won't be for the leftist big government "moderate" functional Democrat the Republican party's primary protocol will doubtless foist on America in 2016. I vote for limited government conservatism to gain power.
I love his morals, and agree with them, that advocate defunding Planned Parenthood, if only because Planned Parenthood enables the evil of abortion with tax dollars no less! But here is one small example of how Santorum's whole political/philosophical approach ABANDONS MORALITY. While he made it clear he would defund Planned Parenthood, he also made it clear that money should be redirected to government programs encouraging adoption!!! As if the government had any more business meddling in adoption, as it did in "planned parenthood." "Too perfect in his morals" ---- !!!!!
Puh-leeeeeze.
Morality, planning parenthood, adoption -- those jobs belong to the Church, to service clubs, to charities, to moral people. The government has no business in administering them. Government's job it is to protect the freedom of people to pursue happiness in a civil, peaceful manner. It's why the Founders declined to write laws regarding morality other than the most basic. Santorum isn't acting "morally," he's acting tyrannically, when he presumes to use tax money to pursue "moral" goals.
Amen.
I disagree. Santorum was talking about the willingness of Republicans to be more political than ideological, the fact that ideology scares to many of the professional politicians. Immigration would be a much better example and for me, the immigration issue and the GOP is much more local.
Today we read in the paper that the drug cartels are moving into Colorado pot stores, being licensed to sell their product. We have already seen the drug cartels move into WA to take over grow operations on Indian reservations and forest land. Lax immigration laws facilitate the proliferation of drug cartels, not put them out of business.
My suggestion for licensing of growers and sellers in WA was that the growers and sellers go through the same background checks and limitations as people who have a concealed carry license, banning anyone who has a criminal record. That won’t happen, though.
Yes I know some of you are on the liberal side of the Republican party and find Santorum too perfect in his morals ...
WHO is on the "liberal side of the Republican party"? Rick's words and record confirm his belief in the morality of confiscating taxpayer money to fund "compassionate" government-run programs that have the potential of gaining him more votes!
YOU, naps, are on the "liberal" side of the Republican party as long as you vote for Republicans who advocate for bigger government.
Santorum ALWAYS voted with Democrats on raising the Minimum Wage, for example, and instead of defunding Planned Parenthood and leaving it at that (which actually would have been conservative) your "morally perfect" Santorum wanted to use that money instead for funding adoption programs -- how is that not liberal, naps).
"Too perfect in his morals" -- you are something more than gullible. YOU are on the liberal side of the Republican party regardless of your stand on social issues.
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.