Posted on 12/31/2011 8:46:05 AM PST by teg_76
Romney is none of those things. He is neither “right”, nor our “best weapon”, nor our best “strategy”. He is not even “good” in the true sense of the word. He is not Christian, he is not conservative, nor even barely a Constitutionalist, he is not principled, nor a patriot. Might does not make right. Never has.
Give us the American revolutionaries. They were not the best, the shiniest, with the most peacock feathers, best equipment and polished boots. Nobody bet on them either. Without the best laid plans, they were simply sneaky bastards, and snipers, belly flat in mud, hanging from trees, willing to so overkill the enemy that they won the day for generations to come, by desire, not desperation and compromise. They were deadly committed to independence, liberty and freedom, and not to any naysayers among them, the Establishment types, sympathetic to compromise. Rather, these types would be abhorrent to them.
I just can’t make myself put lipstick on a Socialist and then pat him on the hiney to go out and represent my country’s foundations. Gag.
Yet Romney did what his conservative adversaries did not: he and his supporters prepared, raised money, put together an effective campaign organization, and have executed well so far. Notably, America’s Revolutionary War generation prevailed because they also took a practical and determined approach to defeating the British.
Apparently you can not be pursuaded by even our Founding Fathers, so why would anything I might say be of any use, or serve any purpose? You are welcome to happily persist in your preference for bright, shiny objects, with the big “S” on it. And it is evidently too late now to warn you not to swallow. Seemingly, it is quite firmly lodged.
No Heimlich here.
33 million of Texas taxpayer dollars and counting in student financial aid to illegals says otherwise.
Illegals obtaining citizenship?
Sorry, but this pee post is taken. Go elsewhere to ponder your naval on the merits of the Socialist schlick and his campaign dance recital.
It seems that since you are unable to back up your claims with facts or logic, you flee the scene while spewing out insults like ink from a cuttlefish.
Is Red State drinking the same brand of crazy juice that Ann Coulter has started drinking?
What a shame.
Didn’t Herman Cain’s camp say that the Perry camp was behind some attack adds against Cain? Then the Cain camp apologized, but now I wonder if it was the Perry camp after all.
James Madison once lost an election because his opponent bought off the voters with booze.
Washington though provided free booze at the polls and was elected to the Virginia House. Characteristically, he grumbled about the cost.
Romney’s father also ran for the presidency, I think Romney has to win it for the old man. I think he will want to serve the full two terms so as not to be seen as a failure like his father.
The time is nigh to get behind Gingrich-Santorum and rout Romney from the field.
I have long been a Perry supporter.
If he does not make it, I support Santorum. Only if Perry drops out.
But for a long time anti-Prerry Freepers have run roughshod over Perry threads. Two of them specifically attack not just Perry, but the person who supports him. The anti-Perrybots have been vitriolic and nasty in the extreme.
After your post I wonder if I should keep Santorum as my main backup ... or cancel your vote.
I’m a Perry supporter and don’t believe in trashing Santorum or any republican candidate. I always liked Santorum but when this race started, many here wouldn’t give him the time of day and totally trashed him because he wasn’t perfect - he supported Specter. If you recall, it was Perry who was relentlessly attacked by all of the candidates so he fought back. At this stage of the game I don’t think Perry or any of the remaining candidates should viciously attack one another. The candidate who does the most damage to obama at the next debate will come be the winner.
At one time I thought Newt was brilliant. Truth be told, in some ways I still think he is. His debate style, his appreciation for and verbal support of the U. S. Constitution is as fine as I have heard.
Sadly, when the pedal hits the metal, he isn’t all that sound on Constitutional matters in his own dealings.
On top of this, Newt simply cannot shake his belief that man has caused global warming, and something must be done. Newt sat with Nancy Pelosi on that couch for one reason. On that matter, he was a fellow traveler with her.
Global warming and the baggage that goes with it, is a very big deal. The things some folks think need to be done in order to ‘turn this catastrophe around’, are mind numbing. I can’t take a chance on a guy like that.
If push comes to shove and I have to vote for Newt or Obama, I’ll vote Newt, but it isn’t going to happen without serious misgivings on my part.
Newt was one of the folks who stated that the Reagan era was over. Newt, the Reagan principles will NEVER be over. The era of those principles, the era of Reagan in essence, will never be over.
On the other hand, IMO, the era of Newt is sadly over.
His efforts in the 1994 time frame will continue to be appreciated by me. I think he was instrumental in recapturing Congress that year. He was instrumental in getting welfare reform through. He was instrumental in balancing the budget too. For some reason, Newt was so unpopular in the House, that he was headed for a train wreck there. He stepped down. He left Congress.
Newt is brilliant one moment, and a (figurative) drunken sailor the next. That’s how I see him. I’m not going to tank on others who like him and wish to support him. I know Jim likes him. You seem too also. I support both of you supporting him if you continue to like him. I just want to be honest about how I see him.
I would encourage you to do whatever your conscience tells you to do. If you withhold your vote from Santorum, you’ll have a good reason for doing so. I wouldn’t criticize you for it.
Thanks Jersey117. I appreciate your comments.
That is a pretty big if. Though there are quite a few TEA party people in the house, it is run by RINO leaders. The Senate is loaded with RINOs. If we don't get rid of most of the republicans up for re-election in the Senate this time, it will still be loaded with RINOs no matter who gets into office as president.
So given your scenario, we will have a DIABLO for president and a house and Senate full of RINOs all working together with RATS to make policy and spend and spend and spend tax dollars.
Perhaps that is a dream come true for you. But that is not what conservatives want. So first thing first. We need to make sure we have a conservative republican nominee. Romney, combined with the RINOs and the Dems, gives us socialism on steroids.
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.