Rally for Romney: Conservatives need to act now, before it is too late.

National Review Online ^ | January 31, 2008 | Mark R. Levin

[CharlesWayneCT]

You are so lucky. I would love to meet him. I’d really love to sit down with him for 15 minutes and ask him some tough questions.

[toddlintown]

It’s got to be Romney.

If it’s The Beast or Hussein, the Dems win.
If it’s McCain, the Dems win. When the NYT endorses McCain, you know the fix is in.

The only way out of this is hold your nose and vote Romney. Of course, if McCain wins the nomination, we’re screwed.

[DoughtyOne]

That’s what I tought. ROTFLMAO

Be sure and keep those blinders properly adjusted.

[JRochelle]

The jerks at National Review deserve what they are getting.

I was reminded about this by an email Laura Ingraham read this morning.

NR was one of the worst bashers of George Allen in 2006, heck they were no better than the Washington Post.

Kathryn Lopez knew that Allen would be a serious competitor of Mitt’s in the campaign for President.
She is so in love with Mitt, she decided her and bunch needed to take Allen out for her Mittster.

Well I am sure enjoying all her moaning and weeping now.
I am laughing 24/7.

[HKMk23]

Here’s where it all hits bottom:

Levin’s right. Mitt Romney IS more Conservative than McCain.

If Romney had been the Senator from Arizona these last many years we wouldn’t have:
Romney-Feingold
Romney-Kennedy
Romney-Leiberman
...

Mitt Romeny would not have been a “Gang of 14” instigator, nor even a participant.

Mitt Romney would not have opposed President Bush’s tax cuts.

On the core issue of our times, I believe that Mitt Romney will stay the course in Iraq, and hold firm in our global march against terrorists, and terrorist organizations.

Further, I’ll go out on a limb and assert that Mitt Romney will prove to be a better friend to Israel than G. W. Bush has been.

Is Romney perfect? HA! No, nobody is, but McCain is WORSE! WAY worse.

Romeny can at least openly discuss how his thinking has changed on issues. Romney can comfortably admit that he’s been wrong in the past.

McCain, when asked point-blank about past mistakes, can’t even begin to get his mouth to form the words. He hems and haws, stutters, stammers, and does pirouettes all the way around Robin Hood’s barn before petering out in a stinking bog of evasion and mealy-mouthed equivocation.

Tell me honestly, do you REALLY want that in a President??

I came from the far right end of the Conservative bench, and I was rooting for someone more pincipled than Romeny. None of those guys are left, but, of the three credible candidates that remain, Romney is THE MOST conservative, the most mentally stable, the most genuine as a person — he’s not 100% in any area, but hes at least 80% across the board. He’s got negatives in his past, but they’re not the egregious, national, Constitution-subsuming negatives that MCCain has “blessed” us with.

I also think there’s a great deal of credibility to the argument that the MSM likes McCain because he’s NOT conservative, and they understand that if he wins the GOP nomination, he’ll be cannon fodder. Heck, he and Hillary are such buds up in the Senate, that if they’re both nominated by the respective parties, this could turn into the most lovey-dovey Presidential campaign in U.S. History. And, BOY would the country be UNITED, again. All of the alphabet orgs on the left could just take the whole election cycle off, because it wouldn’t matter all that much to them who won. All the usual divisiveness would be gone from the campaign... The whole thing would play out like a college bowl game, except that the last play will feature McCain and Hillary in a Shakespearean “et tu, Brute” moment, and we’ll be inaugurating Hillary on 1-20-09.

THAT is what you will get if McCain becomes the GOP nominee.

[Minn. 4 Bush]

Did you finish the 5th grade?

[CharlesWayneCT]

Jimmy Carter didn’t get to pick 2 supreme court justices.

But there are a few people here who blame Romney for killing babies, but their “solution” is to allow another “jimmy carter” to come and appoint to liberal justices that will set back the chance to overturn roe by 30 years — another 30 years of slaughter, when we are THIS close to winning.

At this point, given the alternatives, to reject a conservative platform and give up 30 years of Roe simply because the candidate used to believe differently is a catostrophic choice.

But one that a few people here are not only happy to make, but are pushing everybody else to make as well.

When we end abortion, a million babies a year will grow up to thank us.

[jan in Colorado]

Yep. The media keeps reporting that McCain is the only one that can beat Hillery. Not only is that not true, but if he did beat her, what would be the difference? Not much. I will not vote for him under any circumstances.

When I hear that there are Republicans that are voting for him because he is the only one that can win, it just makes me crazy.

Good to see you tgs.

[DoughtyOne]

I think some of you are operating under a false assumption.

I do not support John McCain because he is basically a democrat.

I do not support Romney for the same reason.

Add Giuliani, Huckabee, and even Paul in there on some issues.

I agree with most of your comments. Is Romney better than McCain? I believe so in some ways. I’m remain unconvinced in others.

[abigailsmybaby]

Tell me how many more democrats we’ll have when McCain grants amnesty by executive order.

[abigailsmybaby]

Tell me how many more democrats we’ll have when McCain grants amnesty by executive order.

[CharlesWayneCT]

So anotherwords, we vote for a guy that will implement 50 to 75% of Hillary’s goals.

That's McCain. It's on his web site, it's in votes he's taken the last 5 years. Restrict speech, global warming, amnesty, close Gitmo, restrict questioning of terrorists. Close the "gun show loophole". Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Support filibustering of judicial and political nominees. Work for "bipartisanship" with the democrats.

He says Clinton would be a good president, Bill and Hillary have "respect" for him. Leiberman (8% ACU) endorses him.

As to illegal immigration, Tom Tancredo's ONE goal in running was to get HIS policies implemented. Tom Tancredo has personally met with Romney, and has spoken to him about this very issue. And Tom Tancredo endorsed Mitt Romney.

I think I trust Tom Tancredo's opinion on what Romney will do more than I trust your opinion, based as it is on some generalization you have that "all businessmen" oppose following the law on illegal immigration.

[redgirlinabluestate]

I can read Mark Steyn online

You hope... given McCain's, Hillary's and Obama's track record on the 1A and other related Fairness Doctrine issues, who knows what will happen....

[CharlesWayneCT]

I trust Mark Levin’s opinion more than yours, but if you want to refute something Mark said in his article with some facts, I’d like to see the debate.

[jporcus]

I totally agree.

He is arrogant and self-righteous. His sarcasm about Romney being in business for “profit” whereas he sacrificed for “patriotism” (yeah - and what about Keating 5 Mr. McCain?) is sickening. His repeated attacks that Romney wanted to withdraw the troops - total lies - is now beyond contempt. And I’m tired of “my friend” this and “my friends” that - which is just fake Senate-speak.

I’ve had it with him. I can’t vote for this man, under any circumstances.

[manapua]

You are willingly blind. There are two things wrong with your fantasy: 1. A standing religious conscience statute that was never struck legislatively or judicially, and 2. the Massachusetts constitution itself and its provisions for free religious exercise. The Romney administration could have fought the legislature's forcing of "Plan B" into private hospitals. To his administration's credit, they initially supported Catholic Hospitals' objections to being forced to make "Plan B" pills available, but once the pro-abortion movement went into action, the Romney administration quickly reversed itself. This is stunning news to any conservatives paying attention at the time.

Totally unwilling to fight for basic principles of religious freedom and conscience, private enterprise, and free association. That's a conservative record?

Look up his similar record on religion, free association, and adoption policy. The man doesn't actually stand for anything.

[Hattie]

Mitt may not win but by continuing on, but he is making a statement about his right to run for office in this country despite what Washington insiders and the liberal press has decided for him. He is absolutely correct that Washington is broken. Washington is no longer working for the people of this country, but only for themselves. They go into office with nothing and come out millionaires. They have huge retirements and complete health benefits and they could not care less about the rest of us.

My hope is he really stabs with some of the ads. Ronald Reagan lost two primaries. Perhaps Mitt will be back to haunt you again and this time folks will know who he is.

[sandude]

I’m not excited about McCain either, but it’s time to get aboard and hope that he picks a conservative VP we can all get excited about.

There isn't anyone who could make the ticket work. It is McCain who the MSM and Clinton machine is going to destroy. People don't vote for VP's.

[Tolik]

With all due respect. I have suspicion that Iowa voters, or Florida voters, don’t listen much to Hugh, Rush, and don’t read NRO for sure. Somehow Huckabee made himself separate from the bottom group and became a major candidate. Fred did not. (just to make sure where I stand: Hunter-then Fred-Romney-Rudy-Mac-Huck). Huckabee gets no traction now, but if Fred did the same, he would have. I like NRO, Hugh, Rush, Prager, Bennet and many others, but am not going to jump if they say so. I suspect Iowa and Florida would even less. I think you overestimate their influence.

[DoughtyOne]

Charles, trying to play this off as if I support a man I’ll never vote for isn’t going to get you any points.

Don’t beleive those lying eyes of yours.