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

Skip to comments.

George Will: Take Congress, not White House
Politico ^ | 3/2/2012 | Tim Mak

Posted on 03/02/2012 6:28:27 AM PST by KansasGirl

Columnist George Will says the 2012 presidential looks like it might be a lost cause for Republicans and believes that the primary goal of conservatives should be to retain control of the House and win the Senate so Congress can restrain President Barack Obama while the GOP grooms its talent for 2016.

“Romney and Rick Santorum… are conservatives, although of strikingly different stripes. Neither, however, seems likely to be elected… If either is nominated, conservatives should vote for him,” Will writes in his upcoming Sunday column, obtained in advance by POLITICO.

However, Will argues, that control of both house of Congress is more attainable and more important.

“[T]here would come a point when… conservatives turn their energies to a goal much more attainable than… electing Romney or Santorum president. It is the goal of retaining control of the House and winning control of the Senate.. [C]onservatives this year should have as their primary goal making sure Republicans wield all the gavels in Congress in 2013,” writes Will.

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-107 next last
To: KansasGirl
George Will is hopelessly out of contact with the real America.

Just yesterday it was reported that EMPLOYMENT among Youth was at 54%.

That's where we win.

That's Greece levels of unemployment in this country for a major demographic. That's Obama kicking his former supporters in the teeth.

They will never forgive him!

51 posted on 03/02/2012 7:15:46 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
I'm gonna go vote for Newt next Tuesday and then I'm going to burn my Republican card.

I'm going to burn it in front of a certain couple of people, who have both drunk the kool-aid.

52 posted on 03/02/2012 7:19:16 AM PST by OKSooner (Never take a known wise-@$$ shooting with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten

Analogy not applicable. German General Staff is not analogous to American Congress.


53 posted on 03/02/2012 7:23:32 AM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
What pointy head East Coast educated intellectual does not realize is, that, despite electing a Republican Congress, IT WILL BE DISBANDED UNCONSTITUTIONALLY BY OBAMA IF HE IS RE-ELECTED.

This is not rocket science we are talking about. He will order it shut down by Executive Order and order tanks around Capitol Hill, arresting any Congressman who cannot go into hiding and assuming all legislative activities under his administrative branches of the Executive.

George Will. Yeah. Real smart cookie that Will feller.

54 posted on 03/02/2012 7:24:15 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo (I liked the FREE REPUBLIC of years on end which NEVER had a problem with Rick Santorum, Conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

Will, take a long hike on a short pier!

You and your fellow faux beltway conservatives have lost it with the rest of us.

Will, you have sunk so low, you are doing OPeds with Politico!


55 posted on 03/02/2012 7:24:26 AM PST by Grampa Dave (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS DESTROYING AMERICA-LOOK AT WHAT IT DID TO THE WHITE HOUSE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ryan71

If conservatives were to control Congress, why would they sit by doing nothing about controlling czars and agencies previous liberal Congresses created?


56 posted on 03/02/2012 7:26:26 AM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

I had posted previously about seeing this same attitude among the FOX commentators a month or two ago. The ones who predicted that Romney would win the nomination also, when pressed, predicted that Obama would win the White House. The urban elite class thinks that liberalism sells, plain and simple. That’s why they have been pushing Romney as the “electable” candidate. Yet when forced to take the next logical step, they have to admit that if liberalism is what sells, people are going to vote for Obama over Romney. Even they realize that Liberal Lite doesn’t beat the real thing.

The urban elites don’t understand the lesson of Reagan, that conservatism when it’s articulated in a way that people can understand is what REALLY sells to the majority of the country. Because at heart, the majority of the country is conservative. That’s why Thomas Sowell is absolutely right that Newt Gingrich is the most electable candidate of the bunch. That’s why liberals don’t try to beat conservatives on ideas, but resort to lies, smears, fearmongering, personal attacks, etc.


57 posted on 03/02/2012 7:32:04 AM PST by JediJones (Watch "Gingrich to Michigan: Change or Die" on YouTube. Best Speech Ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper
If the DC GOP bumbles the easiest White House victory in 30 years, we either remove the leadership entirely and replace it with conservative activists, or we leave and go third party. The fact that they might not even win the White House against one of the greatest human disasters in the western hemisphere in a hundred years is absurd.

What you said! It is beyond stupid that the worst President ever, with the economy in the toilet, is somehow invincible.

58 posted on 03/02/2012 7:32:12 AM PST by Marathoner (In the 80s we had Reagan, Johnny Cash and Bob Hope. Now we have Obama, no cash and no hope.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

As far as the Republican RINOs, Beltway bandits, lobbyists, Bureaucratic Mandarins, spin doctors and consultants are concerned, they would much prefer a liberal Democrat to a conservative Republican.

While the Republicans will almost certainly keep the House and gain the Senate, when it is time for a brokered convention, they will strongly have the upper hand, and the eventual nominee will almost certainly be more conservative than the current bunch.

And a conservative nominee has a good chance to become POTUS. So even before the convention, there are some standards that need to be set for this nominee, as vital to the country.

1) There is a general consensus that Obamacare must be destroyed. But the nominee has got to have vigorous ideas as to how this collapse is to be managed so as not to turn into a major disaster.

2) Likewise, there are going to have to be immense spending cuts and reductions in the size and power of the federal government. This has to be done like surgery to remove a massive tumor. To remove the tumor must be done, but the patient must not be killed in the process.

3) A big part of this, and this will be personally hard for whoever is POTUS, is to agree, with the help of congress and the courts, to *reduce* the power of the POTUS, legally ending the most unconstitutional abuses of the “imperial presidency” by law. This means no more “presidential signing statements”, “Czars”, strict limits on recess appointments, and the restoration of both a strict War Powers Act, and the doctrine of Posse Comitatus.

4) Much of the internal security apparatus of the US must be consolidated. Currently there are 100+ federal police agencies, and police powers have been given to non-police agencies. There needs to be perhaps a dozen such agencies, and all national policing must be done through these.

The TSA needs to be reduced to a fraction of its current size, and their active security role should be privatized.

5) Much federal power needs to return to the states. Most federal lands taken from the states should be returned to them for their own use.

6) Vast amounts of federal regulations must be undone. The slogan of the new administration should be, “If there is no clear constitutional authority for the federal government to do this, it will be discontinued.”


59 posted on 03/02/2012 7:39:32 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

I’m done with voting for the “lesser of two evils”.


60 posted on 03/02/2012 7:44:12 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
George Will is a sniveling little boob. It wouldn't be fair to call him a girl, because I raised three girls with spines of steel.

Will's spine is made of pasta. That's the reason that he is the token conservative for the Washington ComPost.

Last fall, he stuck his nose into Pennsylvania politics to help our Quisling GOP Chairman kill a very logical proposal which would have allocated Pennsylvania's electoral votes on the same basis as Maine and Nebraska: one for each congressional district, two for the statewide winner.

We have solid GOP majorities in both houses and GOP governor who said he would sign it. The best thing which could have happened this year is for BO to win four or five of our commonwealth's 20 electoral votes. Then we could have said "See! It benefited you." The peripheral help it would have given down ballot candidates in not having to compete with chronic voter fraud in Philadelphia would have been incalculable. But George Will helped p*ss away a golden opportunity. He should stick to writing about baseball, a topic which he actually knows something about.

61 posted on 03/02/2012 7:46:25 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
George Will is wronger than the wrongest man in Wrongville on this. Even even Republicans gain a supermajority in both houses, America must still endure a despot who rules by executive ordere and and line-item veto.

We need to get rid of Obama and replace him with a tru conservative, AND we need to get true conservatives into Congress. Until we do, America will continue to be bled dry.

62 posted on 03/02/2012 7:46:33 AM PST by 60Gunner (Eternal vigilance or eternal rest. Make your choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

Who gives a rat’s ass what George Will has to say?

He has never impressed me as any great thinker.

His voice is only amplified - because he presents the point of view his owners want amplified.

Why are these geriatrics never replaced? When did “columnist” become a tenure position?


63 posted on 03/02/2012 7:47:06 AM PST by Eldon Tyrell (question,.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
I don't see how Obama keeps the White House.

Never underestimate the power of large numbers of stupid people.

Much of his voter base doesn't own a car, so they don't care about the price of gasoline, and the unemployment rate in their families has been 100% for generations, so they don't care about that either.

64 posted on 03/02/2012 7:47:42 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

Will just confirming what Limbaugh told us eight weeks ago.
The GOP establishment has already run up the white flag on beating Obama and is just concerned with regaining control of the spending levers in Congress.


65 posted on 03/02/2012 7:48:25 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
Let's see now......Zero keeps his crown and gets to appoint up to three new LIBTARD Supreme Court Justices, not to mention the infiltration of the lower courts with LIBTARDS. And the newly won GOP Senate will filibuster this infiltration of the courts with LIBTARDS? Oh yeah I believe that all right !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama, the messiah, must be removed one way or another if the USA is to survive. PERIOD.

I am working on plan B - where to flee to.
66 posted on 03/02/2012 7:49:08 AM PST by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

George Will-—isn’t he the current version of Al Hunt? Will never really had conservative credtials from my perspective but he did write a fair book about baseball


67 posted on 03/02/2012 7:54:32 AM PST by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio
I am working on plan B - where to flee to.

In England, during the Blitz, it was suggested to the Queen that she should send her children out of London for their own safety.

Her response was "The children are not leaving without me. I am not leaving without the King. The King is not leaving."

I will not flee.

I refer you to Samuel Adams:

...depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

68 posted on 03/02/2012 7:55:40 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

I already know that I will not vote for Romney in 2012.


69 posted on 03/02/2012 7:58:37 AM PST by ansel12 (Newt Gingrich knows how to deconstruct Obama in a head to head race, and that is what it will take.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

George will is just a ball of fun.


70 posted on 03/02/2012 7:59:33 AM PST by Yaelle (Santorum 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

We shouldn’t have to tell George Will that in the US the president controls the political agenda. It’s his football.

The Republicans tried under Speaker Gingrich to seize the agenda from Bill Clinton. It worked for a few months, but with the Media on his side Clinton was able to slowly regain the initiative. I don’t see John Boehner doing any better should the Republicans gain majorities in both Houses.

Then there’s the problem of moderate Republicans. They hold the center of gravity, politically-speaking. They have shown a willingness to bolt the party on critical issues and support a Democrat president. So holding a majority together in the Senate has always been problematic.


71 posted on 03/02/2012 8:05:35 AM PST by Tallguy (It's all 'Fun and Games' until somebody loses an eye!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
Wrong - vote for someone for President ... even if you have to cast a write-in vote for Noneof Theabove.

Anyone who does not want a 2nd Obama term would be a fool to not show up or to show up and not pick the Republican nominee, however imperfect the ultimate nominee is. To do otherwise is essentially a vote for a second Obama term.
72 posted on 03/02/2012 8:05:48 AM PST by TimPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TimPatriot

“The other guy is driving us towards the cliff at 100 mph” is not a reason to vote for the guy who will only drive us towards the cliff at 80 mph.

I’d rather be stabbed in the front by my known enemy than in the back by someone who’s allegedly my ally.


73 posted on 03/02/2012 8:08:33 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

Sorry george, I have no intent of looking at Moochbutt’s repugnant face for the next 4 years, no do I itned to give Obama 4 -OR MORE- unanswerable years.


74 posted on 03/02/2012 8:09:50 AM PST by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TimPatriot

exactly -— a no show or a write in is the same as a vote for obama -— and forty years of a communist supreme court led by chief justice sotomayor -— iow -— the end of America.


75 posted on 03/02/2012 8:10:22 AM PST by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ryan71

Even if the Reps control Congress, Obamacare will be implemented. It is game over this country if we have four more years of Obama.


76 posted on 03/02/2012 8:14:52 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
Columnist George Will

Anyone who is a perinnial Chicago Cubs fan is NOT in a position to decide who is a winner at ANYTHING!

77 posted on 03/02/2012 8:19:46 AM PST by painter (Rebuild The America We love!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ngat

Unless the Reps have veto proof majorities in Congress, the Obama agenda now in place, including Obamacare, Green Energy, massive deficits, etc. will continue to go forward. The WH will continue to have the final say on all legislation. It is one thing to stop new items from being added to the Obama agenda, but it is another to roll back the damage he has already done.


78 posted on 03/02/2012 8:20:56 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

Comment #79 Removed by Moderator

To: KansasGirl

The only problem with this thinking is Obama is morphing into a defacto dictator with his stated goal of going around Congress.


80 posted on 03/02/2012 8:23:59 AM PST by headstamp 2 (Liberalism: Carrying adolescent values and behavior into adult life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

” Will wants MCCONNELL and BOEHNER to control Obama?!?!?!?!”

They are useless cowardly fools. We have no leadership. Will is, as usual, wrong!


81 posted on 03/02/2012 8:53:06 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

Will is just telling us the GOP Establishment’s game plan from the beginning. They want Obama in the White House. They want Rinos to control the Senate or House.

If this was not the game plan from the beginning, they would not have pushed Romney who has a track record of failure in the previous elections and who they know is unacceptable to the majority of the base.

They are traitors. They want a one party system so they can “get things done” - overturn the constitution and create a NAU, global Fed, judiciary, electronic currency and taxation system. They are all singing from the same treasonous page.


82 posted on 03/02/2012 9:00:11 AM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
"...but why is Will saying it?"

It increases his beltway cred.

83 posted on 03/02/2012 9:02:52 AM PST by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

George Wilts.


84 posted on 03/02/2012 9:06:05 AM PST by exit82 (Democrats are the enemies of freedom. We have ideas-the Dems only have ideology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ryan71
What good is controlling Congress when Obama goes around them using his czars and federal agencies while Congress sits by doing nothing about it?

This

85 posted on 03/02/2012 9:07:17 AM PST by AT7Saluki (No cejar, no ceder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

“Then there’s the problem of moderate Republicans. They hold the center of gravity, politically-speaking. They have shown a willingness to bolt the party on critical issues and support a Democrat president. So holding a majority together in the Senate has always been problematic.”

Right on, FRiend. There is no chance of a conservative majority in the Senate in the next Congress. None. Zero. But the RINOs would love to have the majorities and keep the base line budgeting spending fiasco going. Then they will just blame the inevitable tax increases on the kenyan.

The huge red flag for me is none of the top tier new faces ran for President this time. No Ryan. No Christie. No Rubio. The beltway GOP just don’t have the fight in them to take on Hussein and the rabid dims. It’s just not there.


86 posted on 03/02/2012 9:33:15 AM PST by lodi90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper; DuncanWaring; cripplecreek; don-o

I absolutrly despise Romney, but I’d walk over broken glass to cast a vote the candidate positioned to take Obama out.

If Romney doesn’t govern as he has campaigned, we recruit Palin to primary him in 2016.


87 posted on 03/02/2012 10:02:15 AM PST by KansasGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
If Romney doesn’t govern as he has campaigned, we recruit Palin to primary him in 2016.

Yeah that'll happen. LOL

Same GOP game all over again. The abusive husband cons the wife into returning with promises and deals.
88 posted on 03/02/2012 10:05:51 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: kabar

“Unless the Reps have veto proof majorities in Congress,...”

Notice you said “Reps” (I think you meant Republicans rather than Representatives in this case) while I said “conservatives”. Conservatives would not need 2/3 majorities in both houses of Congress to stop the democrat agenda dead in its tracks. They would not need to reverse all the past hundred years of progressive legislation to stop the leftists right now. All they would need to do is not fund the programs and stand up to the leftist threats to “shut down the federal government”. This de-funding stoppage is made much easier due to the fact that the nation is reaching its credit limit. Yes, the reversal of the progressives’ past federal legislative acts would have to wait until we elected a cooperative president and/or veto-proof majorities.

If Obama does get re-elected, I certainly do want at the very least conservative control of both houses of congress for an Obama lame-duck presidential term, and that may be the most realistic and important goal for right now.

I don’t think George Will has what I described in mind when he wrote his column, though. I think he visualized a bunch of faux conservatives, not tea-party types, in the House and especially in the Senate, still “cooperating” with the democrat executive and judicial branches for another four years. JMHO.


89 posted on 03/02/2012 11:15:15 AM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

There are NO MODERATES.


90 posted on 03/02/2012 11:40:13 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: ngat
Notice you said “Reps” (I think you meant Republicans rather than Representatives in this case) while I said “conservatives”. Conservatives would not need 2/3 majorities in both houses of Congress to stop the democrat agenda dead in its tracks.

It is not enough to stop the Democrat/liberal agenda dead in its tracks. Obamacare will be implemented. If Obama appoints two to three more Supreme Court justices like Sotomayor and Kagan, there will be terrible price to pay not for just years but decades. The Constitution will become a meaningless piece of paper.

All they would need to do is not fund the programs and stand up to the leftist threats to “shut down the federal government”. This de-funding stoppage is made much easier due to the fact that the nation is reaching its credit limit. Yes, the reversal of the progressives’ past federal legislative acts would have to wait until we elected a cooperative president and/or veto-proof majorities.

Easier said than done and it would not last for long. We have culture of dependency in this country that will soon pass the 50% mark. We have 54 million on SS, 47 million on Medicare, 60 million on Medicaid (Obamacare will add another 18 million), and 46 million on food stamps. Almost 50% of the population pays no income taxes. And the government controls over 40% of the US economy now, which means any major cuts in spending will affect employment and the economy.

If Congress votes not to fund the programs, the US will operate probably on a continuing resolution. There is no way we will stop funding DOD, our intelligence agencies, etc. And it will signal the Reps political demise in the 2014 midterms. You have to be a lot smarter than just "not fund the programs and stand up to the leftist threats to 'shut down the federal government'"

If Obama does get re-elected, I certainly do want at the very least conservative control of both houses of congress for an Obama lame-duck presidential term, and that may be the most realistic and important goal for right now.

You are making a false choice. I want both and if I had my druthers, I would want control of the WH over control of Congress. The President has veto power, can appoint judges, conduct foreign affairs, and use the executive agencies to do things like secure our border and enforce our immigration laws. He can also rein in out of control agencies like the EPA.

I don’t think George Will has what I described in mind when he wrote his column, though. I think he visualized a bunch of faux conservatives, not tea-party types, in the House and especially in the Senate, still “cooperating” with the democrat executive and judicial branches for another four years. JMHO

George Will is a pompous ass who has lived too long inside the Beltway. He has lost touch with reality. And I find it interesting how pundits on the Left and the Right seem to overlook the 2010 elections, one of the most historic midterms in 75 years.

We will see how electable Obama is in 2012 and whether he is going to be a drag on the Dems. On thing to look for is whether the Dems up for election want to be seen with him during the campaign. Nelson of FL avoided Obama recently when he was in FL. I don't think that Obama can defy the laws of political gravity. 2012 is the Reps election to lose. Once the primaries are over and the GOP can train its guns on Obama and his policies, there will be a different dynamic in play. As long as the election is a referendum on Obama, Obama will lose. He now has a record and hope and change no longer can cut it. Do the American people want four more years of Obama?

91 posted on 03/02/2012 11:41:50 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: kabar

“Do the American people want four more years of Obama?”

We are not on different sides; but the whole point the thread was to discuss what conservatives could do if Obama DOES win. Its called discussing a hypothetical - what to do if the worst happens and the guy IS reelected.

So, to answer your question, the only context in which an answer is reasonably made is to first have an answer to the question “As opposed to who?” Undoubtedly, and unfortunantely, because we now have nearly the univeral franchise in this country, the American electorate just might want Obama again in preference to certain opponents that might be nominated to run against him.

There is nothing “false” about discussing the possibility of - “if Obama does get re-elected, I certainly do want at the very least conservative control of both houses of congress for an Obama lame-duck presidential term, and that may be the most realistic and important goal (other than the presidential election contest) for right now.”


92 posted on 03/02/2012 12:29:51 PM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: ngat

I don’t know how you get more Republicans in Congress if Obama is re-elected unless perhaps conservatives show up to vote but skip the presidency and only go down ballot.


93 posted on 03/02/2012 12:49:13 PM PST by erlayman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

94 posted on 03/02/2012 1:31:10 PM PST by Theoria (Rush Limbaugh: Ron Paul sounds like an Islamic terrorist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

If Will was in charge in 1776 the USA would still be colony of British Empire.


95 posted on 03/02/2012 3:33:59 PM PST by Fred (http://whenmittromneycametotown.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
It's obvious that Mr. Will is out of touch with reality! Obama has already gone around congress and if elected a 2nd term, will go even further to completely ignore them and all of the branches of government in order to push his agenda. Mr. will is out of touch.
96 posted on 03/02/2012 4:33:33 PM PST by klimeckg ("The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: matginzac
One again...Rush is right... he has said that this has been the “elite Pubbie” plan all along because they KNOW nominating Romney will be McCain all over again...true conservatives will sit the election out...

Why would the e-RiNO's adopt such a defeatist, pessimistic strategy? They're essentially throwing the election.

Does it really mean more to them, to retain control of the GOP, than to elect a conservative President? Do they really hate conservatives so much, that they'd throw the White House and two or three Supreme Court seats, just to keep a conservative, any conservative, out of the Oval Office?

Just what are we dealing with here?

97 posted on 03/02/2012 6:14:21 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
Just what are we dealing with here?

Start with this: The GOP establishment is non-ideological.

While the Democrat leadership are committed ideologues -- i.e, using government to achieve an ideological end -- the Republican leadership is in the business of using government to further the limited aim of their own re-election.

They perceive themselves as, and are happy to serve as, "the loyal opposition" and have no ambition to be the "lead party". They're happy to take a turn when the opposing party stubs its toe.

They're comfortable with this arrangement. And they absolutely love being in Washington, being part of the power structure.

Ideology -- especially conservative ideology -- makes them decidedly uncomfortable.

98 posted on 03/02/2012 7:14:49 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: ngat
...and that may be the most realistic and important goal (other than the presidential election contest) for right now.”

Most realistic my a$$. You are spouting defeatist nonsense. Again, this race is the Reps to lose. As long as it is about a referendum on Obama and his policies, Obama will lose. That is the most realistic result.

99 posted on 03/02/2012 9:37:31 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Hypothetical: An assumption used as a basis for investigation or argument, as in “ suppose Obama were to be reelected...”

If even discussing a scenario is forbidden, because talking it through would be “defeatist”, I’d hate to to see what somebody whose screen name is Kabar would do to somebody else who started developing a plan B.


100 posted on 03/03/2012 5:28:44 AM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-107 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