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.
Well, sort of......
I said it was up to the candidates to make their case to us in the next two or three weeks, and then we would need to decide to coalesce behind one, to first defeat Romny, then to defeat the Marxist in chief.
I've been tracking you so you couldn't get my phone number.....
:-)
“As soon as a frontrunner is solidified, most Party affiliates will coalesce around him, even most of the former candidates.”
I don’t remember much solidification behind McCain, do you?
“I’m probably wrong, hope so.”
Yea, you are so wrong, if you think I’m a troll.
That's what this is all about, in a nutshell. We're going to need some heroic sons-a-bitches, even if they are lowly politicians. Any one of these candidates who goes out in the process of taking Romney out to better the chances of another conservative candidate, will be American heroes.
You have never been accused of that. I stated a fact that is taking place in a whole lot of forums. I did forget to also include Romney is all this. Dirty trickster Romney has sent many in to many forums to disrupt. I was told by a volunteer out of Iowa that Romney operatives pulled lots of dirty deals in caucuses to the point before anyone walked in Romney was the winner. But then we both know Romney is no better than the left.
I'd accept that, or either one with some other choice as VP, though I'd prefer Santorum - Gingrich. I'd rather have the more staid individual in the presidency. Let Santorum govern, and Gingrich be the one to take on the establishment/msm. He has the ability moreso than Santorum.
My turn, sorry Jim but this is exactly what I was talking about before.
Shield, that’s an outright lie. Gingrich’s record is rated over 90% conservative. This is the same BS that the Perry fangirls and PDSers do on every thread that led to FR becoming a warzone and ‘circular firing squad.
Shield, YOU and those following your example are the Conservative’s problem and I suspect that you are the Liberal here to create the dissent.
I rarely see more vitriol on FR than that put forth by 2 anti-Perry bots on pro-Perry threads. Luckily Jim calmly put a stop to it.
I wish you would stop denigrating us.
Oops, sorry for the double post.
WTF are you talking about? We didn't respect Clinton. You've been here a few months and say "we" respected Clinton? You're high. Put down the bong.
BTTT!!!
I think i'll wait until after SC and FL. Or until Rush quits writing articles saying not to rule out Perry yet, whichever comes first. ;)
It was one caucus. An open one, at that. Any one of the 3 of them would be foolish to bow out based on one open caucus (whose results have already changed) or polls that are run by liberal organizations.
If Perry makes a poor showing in SC he'll have no problem bowing out and backing one of the other two. Patience!
Do you believe that the truth, in contradiction to historical fact, is that Gingrich has no record as Shield stated?
Or should Perry or ANY OTHER supporter be allowed free reign to spread lies?
If you really mean that, you have to include Mitt Romney in that no-go list. He's the same as the other two, but with a slightly different label.
what conceivable reason can he [RPerry] have for continuing on at this point?
Because he lives (and may politically die) by the creed that’s been deeply ingrained in us since we were knee-high to an armadillo: Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad!
It’s stupid; I know. And hard to explain.
Posted this idea on a thread about Perry coming back:
He still has about $3 million or so in his election chest, and can spend it all in SC, where advertising rates are cheap. That’d be a lot of ads attacking Romney maybe?
I know, a politician being altruistic - ridiculous. I just like and respect the guy a lot. I don’t think that is beyond him, especially not in this case
Small side note: Could whoever runs the Santorum ping list add me please.
I’ve not yet decided who to vote for when the CA primary comes around. Perry looked promising, but fizzled as you stated. Cain had much appeal, but was destroyed by the Obozo thuggery machine from Chitcago. Palin . . . still hoping there is a future for her. At this point in time I’m looking at Gingrich and Santorum. Huntsman - NO. Paul - HELL NO! Romney - I prefer not. God, please let our nominee be someone who can rise to the occasion and get this nation back on a positive spiritual and economic track.
I am saying the anti-Perry bots are disgusting and have been deemed by Jim, no less. to be flaunting the rules.
It is that simple.
It is what it is. I’m done.
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.