Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jim Rob Is Right - But Conservatives HERE Have TWO Jobs To Do!
4/10/12 | Ron C

Posted on 04/10/2012 5:52:15 PM PDT by Ron C.

Edited on 04/10/2012 6:11:00 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

Jim Rob Is Right - But Conservatives Here Have TWO Jobs To Do!

First - blow off that feeling that we're going to lose, or already have lost! No, we're going to WIN.

First item of business, get invovlved in the Tea Party movement, and give D.C. a whole new influx of conservatives in Congress similar in size and importance to that of the last election - thereby blocking any of Obamas chances of having Congressional support for his machinations. Note too, the Tea Party used the GOP vehicle, not a third party. Reason, third parties are losers, because they don't have the national organization and presence large enough to compete.

FReepers need to get involved locally. There are tens of thousands of empty seats in local district Committees of the GOP across this nation - caused mostly by conservative appathy! Just by showing up regularly, you can be assured of gaining a seat from which you can VOTE - go to your county committees and vote there - and go to your state party conventions and vote there! (I personally helped see the ouster of liberal GOP control of the California GOP. Yes it was hard work, but we won - and that win has been, and can be duplicated in these perilous times through the 'hard work' of just SHOWING UP!)

Conservatives have a chance to block Obama, if not replace him. We CAN do that, but conservatives can not win by voting third-party - it's a throw-away vote that nets nothing.

The current GOP-E is NOT the friend of FREEDOM - but they are a very tiny group of RINO's that we can beat the snot out of - simply by doing what we can at the local district and state level. We - FReepers, and other dedicated conservatives - can and have ultimately fielded who becomes part of the GOP establishment. We need to OWN it like we did in the Reagan era, not destroy it through lack of attention to our God given orders to be 'watchmen on the wall' of who become our leaders.

No - it's not too late to shoulder your own responsibility - and earn your own right to say, 'I have fought the good fight, and WE WON.' There will be many opportunities in coming days to 'get involved' - don't let them slip by. Take advantage of the huge opportunities - you can, and will make a difference! It is quite fulfilling to debate hated RINO's FACE TO FACE - WIN when the vote is tallied - and see them denied a seat in party or public office!

Last but not least - we ALL need to get behind our Freepathon. Isn't it worth at least a dollar per day to you to come here, read, post, laugh and debate? Yes, I know, times are rough, and the 'cost of living' has gone way up. But, I'll bet you blow a lot on chocolate cake and ice cream or (insert your favorite deserts) - I, unfortunately, do! So let's all try to push this FReepathon toward an early completion - it might help save your waistline! LOL

TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Breaking News; Free Republic; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 2012election; election2012; elections; jimrobinson; politics; santorumoutofrace; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-346 next last
To: MARKUSPRIME; 2ndDivisionVet
Which is idiotic. Obama will destroy what's left of the country.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Its not idiotic. Thats what its going to take to rid ourselves of Obama, the destruction of our country, which will happen anyway under Romney.

If you think we can rid ourselves of Obama and his nationalist socialist party by electing the likes of Romney, with their downfall, "business as usual" attitude towards Obama, you are very mistaken.

Only a conservative who can name Obama publicly for what he is, draw the line in the sand and take him on toe to toe can defeat him. Romney can't do any of that, nor can the GOP. I will therefore not vote GOP.

And to bring on a more rapid polarization of America, and to bring on the destruction of the GOP as it is now, I will most certainly vote for Obama , unless the Tea Party offers a 3rd party option.

I will NEVER vote for ANY GOP candidate again....EVER! I am done, and so are most of us conservatives. EFF EVERY ONE OF THOSE GOP RINO BASTIDS. I am Tea Party ALL the way, or I 'll vote Obama if the Tea Party does not forward two candidates for the presidency.




261 posted on 04/11/2012 5:14:05 AM PDT by Candor7 (Obama fascist info....
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]


Pretty much the same? Romney wants to redistribute wealth? He hates this nation? He will bow to third world leaders? He’s a marxist? He’s never held a real job? His wife made $300,000 a year doing nothing? He’s akin to a community organizer?

My God, some of you Freepers are just plain delusional, or stupid.

262 posted on 04/11/2012 5:15:23 AM PDT by gortklattu (God knows who is best, everybody else is making guesses - Tony Snow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

Yep our military will bear the brunt of Obamas another 4 years not to mention NASA. Im really getting sick of the people of this country, we deserve to fail as a nation if people will allow Obama another 4 more years. I dont like Mitt but at this point anything is better than Obama. God help us all if some of you so call conservative vote for Obama.

I don't recall seeing anyone say they're going to vote for Obama. Actually, a vote for Romney IS a vote for Obama, because they are functionally equivalent and things would not be materially any different under a Romney administration than they are now under Obama. They are both part of the political elite superclass, manipulating us with the illusion of a two-party system.

Regarding our military - our military complex is part of the problem. It could easily be HALF its current size and still be perfectly able to carry out its Constitutionally-legitimate defensive functions.

263 posted on 04/11/2012 5:20:07 AM PDT by Zeddicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Ron C.

Now that Romney has the nomination sewn up and is on track to dutifully fulfill the GOP E`s agenda and lose by a landslide to Obama, my attention is now turned to holding onto the House. As for the Senate, I`m backing Jamie Radtke here in VA as the conservative to face 0bama`s pet `rat Tim Kaine in November.

As for the Presidential “race,” I`m looking toward the Constitution Party if it nominates Virgil Goode. The upside is that he has as strong a chance at beating Obama as Romney does. With no base and generating no excitement, and with women gravitating back to Daddy/Lover/Provider/Protector Big Government.. not to mention Obama`s machine having not yet even cranked up, Romney is clearly at a huge disadvantage.

The end result is going to make McCain`s loss in 2008 look like a squeaker.

264 posted on 04/11/2012 5:29:46 AM PDT by ScottinVA (A single drop of American blood for muslims is one drop too many!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeddicus
Regarding our military - our military complex is part of the problem. It could easily be HALF its current size and still be perfectly able to carry out its Constitutionally-legitimate defensive functions.

That's a dangerous statement to make on a FR board. Many reputable military annalists say our military, under Obama, is significantly weaker than it needs to be. Obama is selling us out, particularly on nukes and missile defense. It's the sort of thing leftists, pretending to be 'patriotic', say.

265 posted on 04/11/2012 5:32:33 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Zeddicus
Deep defense cuts mean fewer troops

AP via YahooNews ^ | November 15, 2011
DONNA CASSATA - Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of U.S. ground forces would drop to levels not seen since 1940, the Navy would drop to the smallest number of ships since 1915 and the Air Force would be the smallest ever, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said in warning Congress of the dire implications of deeper defense cuts.

The Pentagon chief on Monday offered a litany of drastic steps triggered by the automatic, across-the-board cuts if Congress' supercommittee fails to come up with a $1.2 trillion deficit-cutting plan by Nov. 23. If the panel stumbles, the Pentagon faces some $500 billion in reductions in projected spending over 10 years — on top of the $450 billion already under way.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

266 posted on 04/11/2012 5:33:45 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

I don't know if Romney can or would reverse this trend, but I would think, or hope, that he would at least pull back from the self-destroying course Obama has the country on.

We were told similar things back when Dole was foisted on us by the Ruling Class against Clinton in 1996 and McCain against Obama in 2008.

2012 is a Ruling Class Repeat - a shell game and I refuse to play their game and thus add to the illusion that we are still a Republic under the rule of law.

History is a great teacher, and few will admit what time it is for us, and most will show hubris and ignorance and assert what happened before cannot happen here.

But it has happened, right in our faces and we, like idiots continue to suck it up and deceive ourselves into believing that this election can put a stop to or slow down what the Ruling Class has irrevocably put us on a track for.

On top of that, while America could survive a tyrant like Obama and a Socialist like Romney, it CANNOT survive the fools that put such men into power.

267 posted on 04/11/2012 5:34:17 AM PDT by INVAR ("Fart for liberty, fart for freedom and fart proudly!" - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

Kind of see it this way ...
The elites told us they were on the Dole to give us a second term of clintoons.
Then the elites said McCain them Conservatives, to give us a zer0 or obamanation.
Now the elites give us a myth with mittens, to give us more of the obamanation.

Wasn't intelligent of the elites. All they did was make us more angry.

268 posted on 04/11/2012 5:52:27 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]


Yep military industrial complex is the leftist talking points. We have to have a superior military, anyone who thinks other wise is an absolute idiot militarily or a paulbot dope smoker. Anyhow Im done here, I’ll see you all on the other side when the US collapses after Obama, we wont have time to recover and I fear most people now are lashing out and grasping at straws. If Obama wins this nation as we know it is done, period, and the libs will control whats left forever from 2016 and beyond. Its been a good run see you.

269 posted on 04/11/2012 5:54:52 AM PDT by MARKUSPRIME
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

America could survive a tyrant like Obama

After another 4 years of Obama, it may well be too late to restore the military and our standing in the world. Recall his "open mike" comments/concessions to Putin puppet, Medvedev.

Open Mic Catches Obama Asking Medvedev for Space on Missile Defense
March 26, 2012

"In a private conversation about the planned U.S.-led NATO missile defense system in Europe, President Barack Obama asked outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for space on the issue.

“This is my last election,” Obama told Medvedev. “After my election I have more flexibility.”

“I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir,” Medvedev said, referring to incoming President Vladimir Putin."

Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:

Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.”

Medvedev: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ...”

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” That statement tells us much about the president’s mindset.

The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough. Mr. Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the George W. Bush administration. Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further. The clear implication from the president’s comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.

In addition, there is the phrase “on all these issues,” implying more is at stake than just missile defense.”

Article: Obama plans double cross on missile defense
When it comes to keeping America safe, we shouldn’t be too flexible:

270 posted on 04/11/2012 5:56:47 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: All

.....anyone who thinks and posts that Romney would be worse than Obama needs their computers impounded.

Look around you. This site has been anti-Romney for years and that’s Jim Rob’s right. After all it’s his site.

Little Green Footballs was once a very readable site too until Charles Johnson went so anti-conservative to make LGF unreadable.

I will vote for anybody except Obama and absolutely anyone claiming to be a conservative on this site and proclaims they will vote for Obama are lying about being a conservative and a troll.

Ban me if you want Jim but I will never, ever vote for Obama.

271 posted on 04/11/2012 5:59:54 AM PDT by Chuck54 (Budget? Don't need one. Did I mention I got Bin Laden& Ghaddafi? ....and I'm awesome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Zeddicus
3. Even the remaining free-thinkers of various "conservative" principles are too deeply divided to form a significant resistance.

You make great points. Here though, I'd like to direct your attention to the fact that if the Federal government were reigned in and religious and social issues where left to the State and Local governments, as per the constitution, then these issues wouldn't be as divisive as they are today, on a national level.

272 posted on 04/11/2012 6:05:43 AM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]


Yes, all that too.

Not sure how to reverse the current policy about homosexuals in the military; that looks irreversible. A lot of other stuff IS reversible, at least in principle.

Oh well, support Mourdock against Lugar in Indiana, Hoekstra against Stabinow in Michigan, Ted Cruz for Kay Bailey’s seat in Texas, etc. Send ‘em money, et al. If you can’t run yourself, support your local hobbits for everything from dogcatcher to district school board. Work like Hell for the country class.

And PRAY,PRAY, PRAY, because winning this fight is beyond the strength of mere mortals to achieve.

273 posted on 04/11/2012 6:12:05 AM PDT by ishmac (Lady Thatcher:"There are no permanent defeats in politics because there are no permanent victories.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: gortklattu
Ok, point-by-point

Romney wants to redistribute wealth?
Actually, yes he does. ANY candidate that does not vow an immediate end to federal deficit spending - i.e. no more increases to the debt ceiling - is de facto supporting redistribution of wealth simply because more than 60% of Federal spending is going to social entitlement programs, which are by definition wealth-redistribution mechanisms.

Furthermore, Romney has already demonstrated wealth-redistribution of his own making - his "universal health care" program here in my home state of MA. This is by definition, redistribution of wealth. So yes, he's a liberal redistributionist. Q.E.D.

He hates this nation?
Irrelevant rhetorical question. We cannot ever know what any other man truly loves or hates - we can only measure his actions. Romney's actions define him as a liberal redistributionist.

He will bow to third world leaders?
I have not yet seen his pledge to get us on a path towards true energy independence, such as LFTR nuclear plants and coal liquification. In the absence of such a plan, any US leader is therefor forced to bow to third world leaders, as sustaining this source of foreign energy is our military's #1 mission. Q.E.D.

He’s a marxist?
He has already demonstrated support of wealth redistribution. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is the core principle of Marxism. What do you think?

He’s never held a real job?
Prior job history is irrelevant - what matters is how he would govern. If our President is a liberal redistributionist and governs as such, what possible difference does it make what he did in former employment?

His wife made $300,000 a year doing nothing? He’s akin to a community organizer?

Both points are again irrelevant since he's already defined himself through his own actions to be a big-government, liberal redistributionist with no intention to stop deficit spending, unwind the unConstitutional social entitlement programs, or get us onto a path of real energy independence.

274 posted on 04/11/2012 6:12:08 AM PDT by Zeddicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

On top of that, while America could survive a tyrant like Obama and a Socialist like Romney, it CANNOT survive the fools that put such men into power.

And that happened because WE were lulled into going to sleep at the wheel, leaving our children to be dumbed down by our schools (government run) and media (corporate run) for generations now.

Some even say it was a communist plot. Even if it was, it could never have happened if we had been vigilant.

275 posted on 04/11/2012 6:19:12 AM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Chode

Um, because it is less evil? Less evil better than more evil.

276 posted on 04/11/2012 6:22:50 AM PDT by JTHomes (A lot of injustice is done under the cover of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Pravious

You assume that I’d vote for an unacceptable candidate, third party or not. This is the arrogant Establishment argument:”Shut up and vote for us. We own your vote. If we don’t; get it, you took from us what belongs to us.” Sorry, but it’s my vote and I will use it only to support the principles of liberty.

You waste your vote when you vote for what you don’t believe. Even if there is an R after it.

277 posted on 04/11/2012 6:36:06 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: gortklattu

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama look an awful lot a like on paper. Both have passionately fought for abortion rights. Both have sought for more gun control. Both are tax and spenders who grew big government. Both pushed for Romneycare which became Obamacare as executive office holders.

There may also be a radical leftist connection for the both of them. It seems Barack Obama may not be the only student of Saul Alinsky, who wrote Rules for Radicals. It turns out Romney too was a 60s radical that studied Alinksy.

278 posted on 04/11/2012 6:45:03 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Ron C.

People will pound their chest over how self-righteous-conservative-pure they are and not vote for a specific candidate but I seriously doubt that through the entire nomination process they have adhered to one and only one candidate. From H Cain to whoever... Its called compromise.

You accept the person as best you can and move on with doing your job in life to hold up the ideals you love.

There is a choice between Romney and Obama. You have to be pride-filled-stupid not to see it.

279 posted on 04/11/2012 6:53:48 AM PDT by wallcrawlr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross

>> obamacare was supposed to have been defunded <<

A lot of it WAS defunded, in a House bill. But it was put back in by Senate Dhimms in committee. So the final version of this particular spending bill will have to be worked out by a House-Senate conference. Stay tuned!

280 posted on 04/11/2012 6:56:37 AM PDT by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-346 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
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson