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

Skip to comments.

Jim Robinson: Taking stock of our dwindling conservative inventory
Jan 5, 2011 | Jim Robinson

Posted on 01/05/2012 11:23:02 AM PST by Jim Robinson

Tea party favorite and pro-life conservative Sarah Palin and her family were viciously attacked to the point she chose not to run.

Congressional Tea Party Caucus leader and constitutional pro-life conservative Michele Bachmann had early promise, but I guess came across as too "shrill" and consequently her numbers driven down to the point she exited.

Successful pro-life conservative Texas Governor Perry hit the race at the top but due to missteps and less than stellar debate performances soon fizzled and is now all but gone.

Pro-life conservative businessman Cain and his famous 9-9-9 plan had promise, but was driven out due to indefensible allegations.

Pro-life Reagan Revolution conservative Newt Gingrich reinvigorated his campaign and soared to the top of the national polls, but was unacceptable to the establishment and apparently also unacceptable to the "true conservatives" among us and his numbers are now plummeting

You'd think "unquestionably" pro-life, pro-family conservative Rick Santorum whose recent surge took him to a tie in Iowa and who's now surging in the national polls might be good enough to stand against Romney for the base, but looks like there are "true conservatives" now attacking HIM as not good enough.

Well, drive them all out and who's left?

Huntsman? Who? Moonbat Paul?

Ideas anyone? Should we all continue attacking the conservatives we don't like until we drive them all out?

Personally, I could easily have lived with Palin, Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Newt or Santorum and would be proud to enthusiastically support any of them, warts and all. Any one of them is infinitely better than Obama or Romney.

But if we don't land on one soon and raise him up over Romney, guess who we're going to be stuck with? And it ain't going to be pretty. And if abortionist/statist/progressive Romney (or moonbat Paul) is the one, might as well get used to four more years of Obama. I won't vote for or support either one of those two.

I'd suggest that we all stop trying to tear down the other conservative candidates in the race and instead concentrate on trying to build up our own personal favorites. Who knows? May even discover an acceptable conservative (if not a great conservative) in the bunch. We've never had a perfect conservative yet. Not even the magnificent Ronald Reagan. We and they all have warts.

But we do want to have a candidate with at least an actual CONSERVATIVE record and not an out and out liberal progressive RINO. So let's compare their records and their actual conservative accomplishments but not try to destroy them personally.

God bless and may the best CONSERVATIVE be our nominee.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Free Republic; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: conservatives; elections; eleventhcommandment; gingrich; jimrobinson; newt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350 ... 751-777 next last
To: AlanGreenSpam

I don’t know how many times I have to say it until the RINOs understand, but NO, I’m NOT going to vote FOR a fricking ABORTIONIST/STATIST for president. Period!!


251 posted on 01/05/2012 4:16:28 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: show; All

“And yes, Ann Coulter is a fake and her opinion should be labeled as RINO.”

And IF she should not be a phoney, the cold bucket of water might make her wake up and come home to REAL conservatism.

I am and vote Republican because I am conservative first. Especially when Ronald Reagan was President, conservatives found a home in the GOP. If the GOP stops being conservative, then I won’t be Republican anymore. Ronald Reagan used to be a Democrat and he once said, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, they left me.” Is the GOP going to leave me and other conservatives?

BTW I break down my conservatism as thus:

45% Social/Moral conservative
35% National Defense Conservative
20% Fiscal Conservative

Of course, IMO, it is really hard to separate each, because they intertwine on many levels.


252 posted on 01/05/2012 4:16:36 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
"Grant’s main flaw was drink."

How do you know that?

LOL .. I'll let Bobalu answer that.

253 posted on 01/05/2012 4:17:02 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Tarantulas

There are differences in style and in philosophy of the candidates. I will say there are even differences in character. It does make for a difficult situation for verbal exchange of ideas/intents to avoid ‘plowing up the field to expose/rid the weeds’. The one feature that bothered me in all these debates has been the candidates attacking each other on a personal basis on different positions when the discussion could have/should have been held on the matter devoid of who was/had been espousing what. Such behavior does not increase stature in my thoughts and opinion. That sometimes candidates appeared to be trying to stare down the speaking candidate was also a turn-off. I’m sure some rancor was stirred by the moderators but the candidates should have been wise enough to dodge such baiting.


254 posted on 01/05/2012 4:17:25 PM PST by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Excellent.

Santorum
Gingrich
Perry

In that order, for me. I like Perry’s positions better than Newt’s, but I don’t think Perry would do as well debating Obama. If it goes like the primary debates, the media will eat him alive.

I agree that Romney or Paul would be a disaster for us.

I sure was sorry to see Cain fall. He didn’t handle the accusations well at all.


255 posted on 01/05/2012 4:18:09 PM PST by Rocky (REPEAL IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Well said Jim! I hear you and it’s pretty frightening, to say the least. Romney is essentially “Odrama lite” which is why the MSM is pushing him....

God in heaven needs to hear our prayers and help people get it together enough to support someone decent. Or maybe He needs to open some people’s eyes.


256 posted on 01/05/2012 4:18:15 PM PST by leapfrog0202 ("the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery" Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000

“Its unconscionable that they en mass have forsworn fighting this nations foreign wars, and he should be disqualified for national office based on that alone.”

Newt Gingrich didn’t serve either. Should he be DQ’d? How many more jobs will NAFTA Newt ship to Mexico or elsewhere if he’s elected?

Look - I’m voting against Romney here in GA. I DO NOT support Romney. (I plan to vote Perry fwiw).

But too many brave American soldiers have died in wars fighting for OUR RIGHT TO VOTE....and to just skip the election and let Obama win is almost the same as spitting in those soldiers’ faces IMO.

To hell with Obama. I’ll do whatever I can at the polls to make that happen. Hopefully that means a good conservative. But any (R) left in this race is better than scumbag Obongo.

BTW, who do you think would run as a 3rd party candidate?


257 posted on 01/05/2012 4:19:08 PM PST by Longdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

You may very well be right about Paul’s numbers being fake and computer generated and if so we can discount him and most of his numbers? What % would you think were actual?

If we tally all “actual” but Romney’s count then we can present all of that as anti Romney and present Santorum as a real win. The more this is done in commentary to the media the more the message gets out. If this becomes a general response across the net we’ve just ‘meme’d Romney to the 2nd place. We can all do this easily as we browse the net and media websites this week.

We just need to get a wordsmith to get the gist down so we all pretty much type the same meme to be.


258 posted on 01/05/2012 4:19:53 PM PST by Domestic Church (AMDG ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Conservativegreatgrandma
My reason no. 8 for supporting Perry is that Perry has already taken on the job-killing EPA. Perry knows that excessive regulations and expensive energy kills economic growth.

Western Oklahoma here. The boom is on, for the last 6 months or so. I've poasted this on several threads but apparently, I need to be clearer. By 2017 America WILL be the largest EXPORTER of gas and oil...in the world. Obama and his flunkies can't stop this.......

259 posted on 01/05/2012 4:20:26 PM PST by ScreamingFist (Quiet the Idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Why do I get the impression that you are for Mitt Romney or Ron Paul?

Ok, I'm dead....

5.56mm

260 posted on 01/05/2012 4:23:18 PM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South Hawthorne

Which is why Newt is so right about the other branches needing to find a way to execute more authority over the judicial branch. We shouldn’t have to live in fear of being dictated to by this unimpeachable panel of elitists. Yet it is these very necessary creative ideas that get him labeled as “zany” and not enough conservatives defend him.

Which Justices are expected to be gone in the next 4 years? I thought Ginz was one so that wouldn’t change the balance of the court, just refresh it for a while. Don’t forget to think long-term so, if we had a conservative president in 2016, how much time might it take for some of the liberal justices to pack it in?


261 posted on 01/05/2012 4:23:18 PM PST by JediJones (Newt-er Obama in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: CSI007
It’s time for Rick Perry and Newt to drop out before it’s too late for the conservative side of the equation.

Still stuck on the concept of 100% ideological purity, eh? Newt may be a flawed conservative, but he loves this country and its Constitution, and will fight the leftists like no one else on our side.

He's also had a whole lot of experience in the halls of power, and knows how the Washington game works. Even better than Santorum, who was never in a leadership position in Congress (as far as I know).

Santorum may have come within a few votes of winning Iowa, but I'm afraid that's his high water mark. He's been at or near the bottom in polling since the primary contest began, and will not catch fire hot enough to win a plurality of the primary contests.

That leaves Newt as the only viable alternative. He's going to do well in South Carolina and Florida. I believe his momentum will pick up from there, and that he'll knock Romney out of the running before it's all over.

262 posted on 01/05/2012 4:26:52 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

“Personally, I could easily have lived with Palin, Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Newt or Santorum and would be proud to enthusiastically support any of them, warts and all. Any one of them is infinitely better than Obama or Romney. “

Amen! We’re kicking our own asses.


263 posted on 01/05/2012 4:28:41 PM PST by APatientMan (Pick a side)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

One becomes VP and the other gets his pick of an Admin. Job


Maybe after this weekend a strategy for the three to band together will be set and we can make quick work of Mitt.

They can decide who should execute, who should be the face of the admin, who should integrate and improve while cutting departments. And offer Paul Sec of Treasury. That’ll shut him up.

Wrap this UP!


264 posted on 01/05/2012 4:29:21 PM PST by txhurl (Perry/Pence 2012 OR Perry/Ryan 2012 or even better Perry/Abbott 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: PjhCPA
Santorum's Iowa speech grabbed my heart.

Me too!

265 posted on 01/05/2012 4:30:32 PM PST by Theodore R. (I'll still vote for Santorum if he is on the April 3 ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Bobalu; central_va

Grant? Surely you must be joking. Flawed is an understatement, extraordinary a joke.


266 posted on 01/05/2012 4:32:30 PM PST by mojitojoe (SCOTUS.... think about that when you decide to sit home and pout because your candidate didn't win)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Sorry, but you’re with the wrong Rick. Switch to Santorum 2012.


267 posted on 01/05/2012 4:33:52 PM PST by Theodore R. (I'll still vote for Santorum if he is on the April 3 ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: TADSLOS

The electoral process is inimical to our cherished American exceptionalism. Americans have come to expect a standard of behavior from those who present themselves as presidential candidates. American exceptionalism is key——voters can and should reject those candidates who do not meet the standard.


Newt’s front-runnning status is undoubtedly fueled by his debate responses. Of all the candidates, Newt, alone, has exhibited a formidable presence, and a studied detachment. Newt’s winning Americans over with his profound knowledge of (and a good-natured willingness to explain) govt minutiae to attentive voters.Newt allied himself with Reagan into building the Reagan Coalition. The resultant Reagan Revolution had enornmous consequences: the downfall of the Soviet Union, the Contract with America, government reforms, a shrinking government, tax cuts, a balanced budget, and the great, long-standing Reagan economy. The ACU gave him a 100% rating.


268 posted on 01/05/2012 4:34:16 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Longdriver
Gingrich didn't serve, but his ENTIRE family going back 100 years did, unlike that degenerate scumbag from Kolob Romney.

That glad handing non chicken skin eating douchebag will NEVER be POTUS, and third party candidates to stop him could include Palin , Gingrich, and Trump.

Better to let the communists own the collapse than put some blue blood corporate raider crypto-crony capitalist bourgeois con man in the White House.

Obama reelected only speeds up the inevitable collapse and reset.

The US Federal Government post Civil War has turned into a criminal enterprise run by lawyers and bureaucrats for their own perpetual enrichment at the expense of the productive class.

It has also ceased to be a representative Republic and has turned into a sure to fail Democracy.

The Founders didn't put a right to vote into the Constitution for a very simple reason; they didn't want imbeciles, those under 21, and lazy parasites to be enfranchised, in fact warned against it, leaving the States to determine who could cast ballots.

"Democracies have been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death." James Madison

Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. John Adams: letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.:Thomas Jefferson

This government must be reset with all Amendments other then the original Bill of Rights repealed.

The franchise must be limited and determined by the states.

Incorporate term limits, rotate the Capital amongst the States, and ensure dueling is legal so big mouth politicians will think twice before telling outrageous lies and slanders.

269 posted on 01/05/2012 4:34:28 PM PST by Rome2000 (OBAMA IS A COMMUNIST CRYPTO-MUSLIM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; BlackElk

Black Elk posted this on another thread and I suggested that he post it here, but since he hasn’t yet (maybe he’s offline) I’m going to post it myself. Fits in well with your position IMHO.

I have to give you a longer answer than you might prefer. The question you are asking necessarily requires a subjective answer. It depends on my preferences as to politics, personality and personal qualities of the candidates.

First, if I could construct a candidate from the ground up, what would his/her qualities be?

SOCIAL ISSUE CONSERVATIVE: My ideal candidate would first of all be a noted social conservative since those issues are most important to me. It would be ideal if the candidate were a committed member of a socially conservative church. I am a Roman Catholic but I can easily support candidates who are Evangelical, Missouri Synod Lutheran, Wisconsin Synod Lutheran, Eastern Orthodox Christian, Orthodox Jewish. Being a pro-life hard-liner is an absolute necessity. So is being committed to marriage as traditionally understood (one man, one woman. ideally but not necessarily for life at least). I prefer candidates who are so married and who have responsibly raised a generous number of children. As Commander in Chief, the candidate must be committed to restrain military abortions to the extent possible and to discourage the homosexualization of the military (or diplomatic corps for that matter). The candidate’s other views should be consistent with the aforementioned. It is also vitally important that the candidate be credibly committed and have (preferably) a track record of resisting judicial tyranny and of supporting the nomination and confirmation of judges absolutely committed to the values of Judaeo-Christian civilization.

On these issues, Mitt Romney has largely walked the walk in his personal life, remaining married to one woman for forty-two years by whom he has had numerous children of whom he may well be proud (at least insofar as I have seen them). Unfortunately he has NEVER walked the walk in his public life. His failure on these issues as Massachusetts governor was epic and that was because he did not want to succeed on these issues. Ron Paul, whatever his personal life, disqualifies himself by his commitment to doing NOTHING to advance social conservatism and hiding behind the Tenth Amendment as an excuse for inaction while social conservatism is being attacked with D-Day fury by SCOTUS and other courts. Huntsman is “gay friendly.” Newt Gingrich is infinitely more trustworthy on social issues because he understands and agrees with social conservatism and has the track record to prove it. Ditto Perry and Santorum. Newt has obviously not walked the walk in his personal life but I can overlook that since God forgives sins and I am convinced that Newt has sought and received forgiveness. Rick Perry has walked the walk both in his personal life and as Texas governor. Long married to Anita and no one else and has children. BTW, I don’t make distinctions between those who are birth parents and those who, perhaps unable to bear children of their own, have generously brought adopted children into their homes. Rick Perry made one mistake with Gardasil but it seems to be his only social issue mistake. Perry has made significant progress in defunding the Planned Barrenhood organization (the flagship organization of so many evils) in Texas. Santorum, in his time in the US Senate, was nothing less than the leading champion of social conservatism in that body. He even took on the Catholic Church leadership for raising large amounts of money for the Campaign for Human Development which funds pro-abortion and anti-family lobbying groups. He has about eight children, home schools, and has never wavered on social issues. Advantage: Santorum. Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry are both verrrry good.

MILITARY/FOREIGN POLICY: All three (Newt, Perry, Santorum) are quite trustworthy on matters military and unlikely to either ignore threats to our interests or to fail to rebuild our military. Goal: A substantial military, equipped well-beyond current levels, ready, willing and able to repel any attack and to attack anyone needing to be attacked: short, swift massive victory and get the hell out. Great Britain and Israel and other allies WILL continue to exist and any attacks upon any of them will be avenged. A military not only second to none but so far ahead of whoever is next that no enemy will even consider harming the US. Interventionism and not isolationism. All three are quite good and I perceive no advantage among them. Newt might be marginally lest interventionist but not enough to matter.

SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS: All three are fine on these issues and Romney is not at all trustworthy whatever he may self-servingly say. In vetting federal judge nominees and particularly SCOTUS nominees, special attention must be paid to the potential nominee’s commitment to read and apply the Second Amendment as written. Perry may have a slight edge on this issue as people have credibly observed that, if Perry becomes POTUS, he will pack seerious heat and protect the Secret Service agents attached to him rather than vice versa. Although Newt and Santorum may shoot and hunt occasionally, Perry is the real deal as a gun guy.

ENVIROWHACKOISM: Newt is a bit vulnerable on this sort of issue because he just cannot resist thinking out loud and because he always wants to appear to be cutting edge. We can do without that. Perry and Santorum are a LOT more interested in creating decent-paying jobs for ordinary Americans than they are in the destiny of the furbisher lousewort or other obscure flora and fauna whose interests are forever invoked to reduce non-elite Americans to freezing to death in the dark in our environmentally sound but unheated thatch roofed huts. Advantage Perry and Santorum.

REGULATION: Perry did not create all those jobs by regulating otherwise free enterprise. Newt and Santorum spent a lot more years as legislators and have undoubtedly favored regulations more than Perry has. Advantage: Perry.

TAXATION: I am a conservative and not some sort of fiscal radical. I have an inherent distrust of shiny new tax schemes. The ultimate objective should be to reduce unnecessary (underline: unnecessary) spending to allow tax reductions. I would require Congress to make good on the IOU’s that are the only contents of the “Social Security Trust Fund.” I would end the fraud that Social Security is an insurance scheme and the myth that we who collect have “earned” our checks. Social Security is and always has been a welfare program under the appearances of insurance. Let’s formalize its true nature by paying SS out of the general fund as the “fund” dwindles. Ditto Medicare. None of the three candidates under consideration would go that far. Abolish the payroll tax. Ditto. Santorum’s gut instinct is to follow Catholic social policy and he is probably closest to my view on this but not very close. Newt and Perry not so much. I don’t want any other schemes for significantly shifting the tax burden to those of modest means. No VAT, no Flat Tax, no Fair Tax, no National Sales or Property taxes. No reducing or eliminating home mortgage deductions, exemptions for each child, earned income credits or whatever other tax advantages may accrue to conventionally married husbands and wives and their children. We should concentrate as much in the next ten years (and the foreseeable future?) on treating people of modest means as generously as we have been treating the trust fund babies. My gut tells me that Santorum has the advantage on this one. Feel free to disagree for whatever reasons of your own.

FUTURE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE GOP: Since, according to Thomas Edsall’s famous recent op-ed in the New York Times, the Demonrats have determined to abandon the white working class, I prefer that the GOP relentlessly campaign for their loyalty. In doing so, we will inevitably also recruit non-white Americans of modest means. We are not going to attract the sociologists, the leaders of gummint unions, the Scientologists, the sexually perverted/American community, the feminazis, the welfare folks who are satisfied with everything but the size of their checks and the breadth of their entitlements, the pacifists, envirowhackos, and various other subgroups of the weirdo American community. We need to aim for a future of a GOP dominated by normal folks: blue collar workers, small business owners, people without college degrees, independent contractors, respectable retirees, conservative blacks finally fed up with decades of social and economic disintegration dealt them by Demonrats, Hispanics (especially the socially conservative ones who also insist that their kids be fluent in English and not servants of poverty pimps), Asians, Indians (from roots in India like Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley), people of commitment to conservative religious faiths, right to lifers, gun folks, conscientious parents, homeschoolers, the sort of disenfranchised people who are the backbone of the Tea Party: not trendies, not fashionables, not Code Pinkers, etc. I trust all three candidates on this matter of future demographics. Most of all, I trust Santorum: advantage Santorum.

OTHER ECONOMIC ISSUES: I do not believe as strongly in fiscal conservatism as do many here. I tend to agree with Lincoln (did I really say that?) and with Pope Leo XIII on the question of subsidiarity. Generally keep government functions as local as possible but the central government CAN and (perhaps) MUST do some things that we cannot do for ourselves. Many here would call that a liberal view but I would suggest that it is a view shared by many of the Founding Fathers. It has been suggested that Santorum holds some “communitarian” views (see Amitai Etzioni) and that may be mildly true but community has advantages over fang and claw individualism and need not be taken as far as Etzioni takes it. There will never be another Ronald Reagan or Mother Theresa or Padre Pio or Bill Buckley or Ludwig von Mises or Friedrich von Hayek. There IS now a Rick Santorum and attention ought be paid. WHO CAN WIN: If Romney is nominated, he will lose exactly as McCain did. Conservatives will avoid voting for Romney out of disgust. Therefore beating Romney is job #1. Even with Cain and Bachmann out of the race, we still have given Romney the advantage of running against Perry, Santorum and Gingrich, all conservative and all with dedicated constituencies who divide the conservative vote. Paul will take some “fiscal conservatives” from Romney but not many given his fruitcake foreign policy ideas. He brings Demonrats and college radicals into GOP caucuses and primaries as a sort of Woodstock reunion. WE need to coalesce around one candidate now and stick with that candidate. Once Romney is defeated, Obozo is next along with his Congressional and Senatorial allies.

CONCLUSION: For all of the foregoing reasons and because he currently is drawing more support than the other two, if the primary were today, I would vote for Rick Santorum and pray that God will protect us one more time. Ask me in a few weeks and unseen events may have changed my mind, but, if I change now to Gingrich or Perry, it will be only for pragmatic reasons that one of them has resumed a credible and apparently lasting lead over the other two. My personal judgment is that Santorum is the best of the three and the best alternative available to us.

Thanks for asking.

Black Elk

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2828719/posts?page=145


270 posted on 01/05/2012 4:35:01 PM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bobalu

Precisely my rationale for supporting Newt as well.


271 posted on 01/05/2012 4:35:46 PM PST by WWRD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: caver

Is it really our people taking them out? I haven’t paid attention to screen names and such but it seems like a great way for Obama or Romney to take out the competition, to plant trolls on the boards.

I’m probably wrong, hope so.


272 posted on 01/05/2012 4:40:05 PM PST by Kenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

If it’s Obama or Romney as the next president, just pray (and donate) that we take the Senate and gain in the House. If we do that, we’ll be okay — sort of.


273 posted on 01/05/2012 4:41:21 PM PST by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

At best Romney is a Clinton-like figure, totally dishonest, without convictions, will say anything to get elected, and will shift his positions to go wherever the polls go. You might say that’s less risky than a pure liberal, but how do we know which way the polls are going to go? He already abandoned Kasich when his union fight was unpopular, he wants to keep Obama’s higher taxes on the rich, he defends everything liberal he did in Massachusetts because it was “popular,” etc. Romney is not a guy who is going to move the country in a conservative direction, maybe not in any direction at all. It’s more likely that he’ll go whichever way the wind blows.

However, we can be sure he will keep the status quo alive and well for the elite ruling class which he is a member of. Those are probably the only core convictions he has.


274 posted on 01/05/2012 4:41:21 PM PST by JediJones (Newt-er Obama in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000

I’m on a tablet and don’t know how to copy and paste but YES!

Especially the part about letting the Communists own the collapse.

Much later tonight I’ll try to Chevy in and explain.
.


275 posted on 01/05/2012 4:43:39 PM PST by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts bolt The Constitution together as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Santorum may have come within a few votes of winning Iowa, but I'm afraid that's his high water mark.

Oh, no, he's now just 8 points behind Romney NATIONWIDE! Santorum 2012. He's really passionate, committed, and articulate. Give PA another chance to redeem itself!

276 posted on 01/05/2012 4:44:01 PM PST by Theodore R. (I'll still vote for Santorum if he is on the April 3 ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I understand the frustration. But the damage that zero has/is doing is going to take nothing less than a COMMITTED Republican.

Anyone less will not have the nerve to do what we all know needs to be done.


277 posted on 01/05/2012 4:44:54 PM PST by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
Whoever takes the oath on January 20. 2013 will confront MASSIVE and SYSTEMIC political problems, and will be master in name only of a Federal bureaucracy infested with Marxist-Leninists with civil service protection.

In other words, we need an ass-kicker with balls of steel, who can also get elected.

I announced my support for Newt here right after Sarah's announcement. I still believe he has the right skill set to manage the Presidency and the Executive Branch, should he win. I am happy to vote for him next Tuesday.

I'm sorry, I just don't see Santorum in the same way.

278 posted on 01/05/2012 4:45:55 PM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

We may not have to deal with Obama this coming fall 2012. Here’s why:

IS JOE BIDEN GOING TO BE OUR INTERIM PRESIDENT...

VERY QUIETLY OBAMA’S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES THE SUPREME COURT

AP - WASHINGTON D.C. - {excerpt}

In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama’s qualifications for the presidency, the group “Americans for Freedom of Information” has Released copies of President Obama’s college transcripts from Occidental College ... Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.

http://politicstoday.biz/2011/12/is-joe-biden-going-to-be-our-interim-president-before-the-end-of-this-year/


279 posted on 01/05/2012 4:46:05 PM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Anyone who says that Santorum is “not good enough” wants God Himself to run. Santorum isn’t just good; he is great. Remember, even the great Pres. Reagan blundered occasionally, both as goveror and President. Bob


280 posted on 01/05/2012 4:47:46 PM PST by alstewartfan (27 of 36 of Romney's judicial appointments were DEMOCRATS!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

I did tons of FaceBook, twitter and WingRight.org posts.
Here’s my blog http://wingright.org/2012/01/05/im-interviewed-about-governorperry-in-ia-patch/ on an article quoting me on Caucus night, with picture
http://iowacity.patch.com/articles/candidate-party-color-story-tk

Here’s a brief report about the Caucus night - and the Ron Paul supporters I ran into. http://wingright.org/2012/01/03/caucus-night-iowa-for-rick-perry/


281 posted on 01/05/2012 4:49:56 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Thank you Jimrob. I actually dropped out of FR for a month or so simply because things were getting too vindictive. I want that level of vitriol I can go argue politics down the pub!

From the view this side of the pond, Perry is good. Gingrich - well he is going to have problems as we have long memories and, though it is hard to believe, we respected Clinton - yes, even we conservatives here. Santorum gets a lot of respect but hasn’t a lot of international name recognition. Romney is considered another Obama in a lot of ways.
Sure, we are foreign, but the USA does not exist in a vacuum. Give us a man of his word and strong conservative principles, who respects his allies and we’ll be happy.


282 posted on 01/05/2012 4:50:11 PM PST by EnglishCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000

I don’t care what Gingrich’s family service was. What matters is what Newt’s is..and it’s non-existent.

Look, I agree completely with you: Romney’s a complete flip-flopping scumbag jack-wagon. I just think Obama’s worse.

thanks for your civility. I’m apprehensive on replying much here, as I’ve seen some nastiness!

PS: I also agree with term limits and love your idea of dueling! I don’t like the rotating Capital idea though - keep those jerks in DC and away from me! Hell, go ahead and fire most of ‘em!


283 posted on 01/05/2012 4:50:51 PM PST by Longdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

“I’d suggest that we all stop trying to tear down the other conservative candidates in the race”

Are we to look the other way when legitimate concerns arise during this primary? If say tomorrow Gingrich were to applaud Obamacare would we then have to keep quiet about it?


284 posted on 01/05/2012 4:51:47 PM PST by KantianBurke (Where was the Tea Party when Dubya was spending like a drunken sailor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: musicman

Newt’s my guy and I’m sticking by him to the end. His brilliance never fails to amaze he.


285 posted on 01/05/2012 4:52:58 PM PST by mojitojoe (SCOTUS.... think about that when you decide to sit home and pout because your candidate didn't win)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
...he imagines the Obama reelection campaign staff getting up early every morning, reading the papers about the Republican primary battles, smiling and going back to bed.

Your friend is right - but not for the reason you think. The press is ON THE SIDE of democrats. Here's how it works: If a democrat is trashing another democrat, it doesn't make the news. It's treated as 'talking our of turn' or showing the families dirty laundry...

Dems do to trash each other - but it's NOT reported. Well, not reported much.

When a Republican trashes another Republican - the 'trasher' gets invited to news shows across the MSM... McCain flew that game for years. He and the so-called press referred to him as a maverick - but he wasn't. He was the person always willing to belittle his fellow conservatives.

Have you noticed the 'press' has never NEVER found a dem 'maverick'. A dem who turns on his own is NOT a press hero.

Then there's the debates. Leftist members of the MSM do what they can to start fights - or push our folks to discuss issues that matter to liberals not to us. Notice how 'fast and furious' didn't come up? Not much about Obama's horrible economy either.

The earth would stop moving if a bunch of dems running for office debated while being questioned by Limbaugh, Hannity and Levine. They're smart enough not to do that - we should be too.

If we want a shot at this we have to stand up to the MSM ...

286 posted on 01/05/2012 4:53:20 PM PST by GOPJ (Democrats are using immigration deliberately to change the electorate.. Freeper Williams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
My humble opinion:

I think it depends on how they run from now on, and what they say. People are starting to pay attention now.

What America wants to hear:

A. will fix the economy: JOBS top priority for the average American

What our nominee needs to say about that:

1. The only way to create is to pave a smooth path for businesses: loosen regulations, lower taxes. Allow businesses to start up. Allow employers to feel that their future is BRIGHT!

2. Everything Obama has done since his nomination has been exactly the opposite of what is needed. It seems to be deliberate, because creating a dependent class creates more Dem voters.

B. Will keep America brave and proud in the world. Will align us with our history of freedom promotion once again.

What our nominee needs to say:

1. Will cut funding other countries down to lowest strategic denominator but will NOT forget our friends. Will keep our military strong, will be judicious in its use.

2. Obama apologizes for us, wants us to be equal to all other countries, etc.

C. Will close our borders. Will reduce our illegal alien problem.

What our nominee needs to say:

1. We will seriously close the entire border with whatever it takes to do so. Period.

2. We will make it impossible for illegals to find work here, by enforcing huge fines on ALL EMPLOYERS big and small, and we will put whomever it takes to that task, national guard, whomever, will be sent door to door, factory to factory. Find the illegals and fine the employers. They will self deport in huge numbers when they can't find work.

3. Encourage the states to begin strong temporary or seasonal work visa programs. Give people with several seasons of good hard work and conduct the chance to immigrate.

D. Obamacare MUST be stopped cold NOW.

What our nominee needs to say:

He just needs to say exactly how he will stop it period, and kill it dead so it can never rise again. Explain how unconstitutional it is.

Our nominee most of all needs to explain the Constitution to the American people, and deliver some of the best quotes from the founders, like "If you try to make everyone safe (even economically), you end up with making them less free, and not safe anyway" (bad paraphrase). And "Wait until they see they can vote themselves money." And Ben Franklin's "A republic. IF YOU CAN KEEP IT." The one who best gets all of that across should get to be our President and help us get our Free Republic BACK!!!!!!

287 posted on 01/05/2012 4:53:33 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll
... Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.

Some of this sounds exactly like something I read well over a year ago that was then shown to be bogus. The piece goes on to repeat the Pakistan no-travel story which has since been shown to be false.
288 posted on 01/05/2012 4:54:23 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Hi Jim,

I was and am a Palin guy. While I did not agree 100% with her (or any other candidate’s) positions, I believe her ‘vision’ most closely represented my own. But she’s not running and that’s the way it is.

That leaves me to ask myself, “since the remaining crop is far less aligned with my beliefs and principles in one way or another, how many of them am I willing to abandon to achieve the greatest benefit to the country...or should I just sit back and watch Utopia burn?

It’s a tough call. And it is so because as you know from our correspondence, in addition to the left, so many so called conservatives have shown their willingness to gut actual conservatives and mock openly conservative Ideals, here on FR and across the spectrum as a whole.

To be honest, outside the fact that I will not vote for “Proven liberal by his actions” Mitt Romney, nor will I vote for “Proven insane by his actions” Ron Paul. Using my standard of belief/principle above, would require me to abandon nearly ALL of what I hold dear. It is my opinion that anyone who would vote for either is no better an American than Paul or Romney. Others are free to disagree.

No to the rest. If I am to vote/support a candidate, who and why?

While I still hold my Republican registration, I consider myself no longer a part of the party. It’s leadership refuses to follow it’s own platform. That platform is one I very largely agree with. Therefore, I would base my vote upon the person who has demonstrated by action first and statements/intent second (for those lacking vote records etc.) a willingness to abide by it.

The result is Gingrich-Santorum-Perry in that order And Perry would require q 180 on his border illegal issues because while I LOVE his gut DC stance and his energy policy, I am not amoured of his LaRaza speeches or overall border plan. That said, I have issues with Newt as well as Santorum. They are not insurmountable.

I do however believe Newt to be the pit bull rabid dog Republican that would not simply pull a Bohner once elected, but would take the fight to the Democrats/Communists on the vast majority of the issues and not cower to the media. That is enough to get my vote.

Santorum, I share many personal values with, but am less inclined to believe he would be the aggressive force needed. He would still get my vote.

As above, I have many issues with Perry. If he comes around on that one biggie, he would get my vote. Not with enthusiasm, but with the alternative being Obama, He’d get it.

So, to sum it up, We all have to sacrifice some Ideals. How many is a question each of us must answer for ourselves.


289 posted on 01/05/2012 4:54:37 PM PST by Norm Lenhart (Curse you, Norm Lenhart! Im slain, crumpled in a ditch by your obvious superiority - Humblegunner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll

Your linked article repeats a foundational birther falsehood: “Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. .. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981”

That is demonstrably false. There are only three countries that US passports have ever been invalid for travel to: North Korea, Cuba, and Libya. I have personal knowledge that frequent travel to and from Pakistan with a US passport was possible continuously from at least 1978-1982. I do not believe there has ever been one day between August 15, 1947 and today on which the State Department restricted travel by US citizens to Pakistan.


290 posted on 01/05/2012 4:56:04 PM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Well said.


291 posted on 01/05/2012 4:56:11 PM PST by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

I’m not counting Perry out, there’s a long way to go until November. I disagree with some of his immigration policies but I could vote for him very easily.


292 posted on 01/05/2012 4:56:11 PM PST by mojitojoe (SCOTUS.... think about that when you decide to sit home and pout because your candidate didn't win)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DeusExMachina05
Romney isn’t the greatest but shoot, he’d be far better than Obama.

Prove that by citing Romney's record, and you've got my ear. Go ahead - I'm listening. How's he far better than Obama?

293 posted on 01/05/2012 4:57:11 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
LOL .. I'll let Bobalu answer that.

I think Bobalu is still reading the link posted in #168.

294 posted on 01/05/2012 4:59:15 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon
Thank you Jimrob. I actually dropped out of FR for a month or so simply because things were getting too vindictive. I want that level of vitriol I can go argue politics down the pub!

Well, thank God. You being here on FR an entire 6 months.....woof. We would not want you uncomformatable........go back to DU....Dumbass

295 posted on 01/05/2012 5:00:27 PM PST by ScreamingFist (Quiet the Idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: pollywog
RUBIO if he will change his mind.

Don't know how true it is, but someone upthread just said that three of Romney's ex-staffers went to work for Rubio, the moment he showed up to take his Senate seat.

I think that's disturbing.

296 posted on 01/05/2012 5:00:59 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke

If we continue on the path we’re on we will have NO acceptable candidates left. Anyone who truly believes that ANY of our conservative candidates is ok with ObamaCare is beyond help. Newt is fully committed to repealing ObamaCare as is Palin, Cain, Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, et al. The only one whom I’d have any doubts about is Romney who still today brags that RomneyCare (which is functionally identical to ObamaCare) is a “conservative free-market solution.”


297 posted on 01/05/2012 5:01:50 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Well said Jim. I think it’s encouraging so many conservative candidates have stood up to Romney and that there are still a few standing. Gingrich, Perry, Santorum can all have my vote in the general.


298 posted on 01/05/2012 5:03:31 PM PST by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

“...than Santorum, who was never in a leadership position in Congress...”

Santorum was the third highest ranking Republican in the Senate. He was billed as “the Republican the democrats love to hate.”

From wiki:
As a Senator, Santorum was the chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, making him the third-ranking Senate Republican from 2001 to 2007.

Santorum is considered both a social and fiscal conservative. He is especially well-known for his strong social conservative positions, his role in enacting welfare reform in 1996, and his views on U.S. foreign policy towards Iran.
**************************************************

If not Santorum, Newt or Perry suits me just fine.


299 posted on 01/05/2012 5:03:58 PM PST by MestaMachine (obama kills)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: DeusExMachina05
He [Romney] is for a corporate tax cut. He is for keeping military spending at current levels. He is for school choice and vouchers.

Interesting. Does his record in office comport with those campaign promises? Bet it doesn't. Matter of fact, I know it doesn't.

So campaign blather aside, where does his actual record substantially deviate from that of any other big government, statist liberal?

300 posted on 01/05/2012 5:05:05 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350 ... 751-777 next last

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.

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