[cherry]

are we not about states rights?...that individual states can set up things the way they want?....

come on Charles Baker...

[Diogenesis]

Excellent. Citizens in states should choose.

But, Romney CHOSE RomneyCARE (and his enforced
gay marriage where he overturned the Commonwealth’s
Constitution) without a vote.

Baker (installed by Romney) was installed without
a primary. Baker is FOR RomneyCARE.

No conservative should vote for FORCED candidates
who support FORCED antiConservative policies.

NO BAKER.

NO ROMNEY.

NO ROMNEYCARE.

NO OBAMACARE.

If you disagree with with one, you disagree with all.

[BlackElk]

cherry: I cannot tell whether you are being sarcastic or whether you actually support this Baker. If you were being sarcastic, my apologies. Just in case you are supporting Baker, my reply:

Issue #1: Given the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, are those powers not specifically delegated to the US Constitution reserved to the states and the people respectively? ANSWER: Yes.

Issue #2: As conservatives, do we oppose socialism, communism, Marxism, Leninism, Obamunism or whatever it may be called this week regardless of whether it raises it ugly head federally, statewide, locally or in a state not of our personal residence? ANSWER: We are conservatives. We despise such isms wherever they arise. In most states nowadays, I may have a "legal" "right" to engage the amorous activity of my neighbor's wife. That does not mean that I would, should or ought to do so. Conservatives have standards. If conservatives transgress, they prove that, in the immortal words of La Rouchefoucald: "Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue." Few of us would claim that adultery is somehow morally correct.

Issue #3: Can actual conservatives EVER support the likes of Charles Baker and his radical gay running mate (running as "Republican" candidates if you please or if you don't please) who describe themselves as being to Obama's left on social issues? ANSWER: Puhleeze!!!! Of course not.