Skip to comments.We will not waste our limited resources on FR in support for a liberal progressive LIAR
Posted on 04/13/2012 12:13:14 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
A reminder for those who are not receiving the message:
Romney is a pathological compulsive liar. Lie after lie papered over with more lies. Doesnt even flinch when caught in bald faced lies, simply tells another big whopper to cover up or dodge the issue. Funny thing, the man actually seems to believe his own latest lies and simply ignores the glaring record of his past actions/lies. And you have true blue establishment elite RINO Republicans like Karl Rove enabling and backing up his lies. Their motivation is simply to hang on to power (and riches) any way they can.
Ive stated many times since Romney started running for the presidency way back when that Id never vote for him and I will not. He cannot lie his way out of his decades long record of support for abortion, Roe v Wade, planned parenthood, gay rights, gun control, global warming, amnesty, liberal judges, big government, compulsory or socialized health care (RomneyCommieCare), mandates, Keynesian economics, support and approval of TARP, bailouts, stimulus packages, i.e, every damn liberal progressive issue that comes down the pike.
Cmon. These are the reasons the tea party sprang up and the reasons he and Rove loathe the tea party and our tea party conservative candidates. Romney famously expressed his loathing for Reagan-Bush conservatism several years ago when he was trying to run to the left of Ted Kennedy and now hes cloaking himself in Reagan conservatism, knowing full well that its a lie, but he knows its the only way he can possibly win, er buy the Republican nomination.
Screw Romney!! I absolutely will not support or vote for a proven compulsive liar with a known record of abortion and big government socialism, liberal appointments, etc. He still lies about RomneyCommieCare today. Calls it a conservative solution. Get real!!
Listen to what Ronald Reagan had to say about the elites pushing socialism on America via compulsory health insurance:
Ronald Reagan speaks out against RomneyCommieCare
There will be no campaign for this Massachusetts liberal liar on FR!!
Damn the libs and RINOS, full steam ahead!!
But no matter what happens we must turn out in November to vote IN as many conservatives and vote OUT as many rats as possible at all levels of government. If we don't have a conservative at the top of the ticket we must turn out anyway and vote straight conservative DOWN ticket!! Just think of it an off cycle election and pour on the TEA!! It'll be doubly important that we control both houses of congress and as many statehouses as possible.
Restore the 10th amendment!! Impeach the leftist president whoever he may be!! Restore Liberty!! Rebellion comes from the bottom up!!
WOO HOO!! I CAN SEE NOVEMBER FROM MY HOUSE!!
No Bama!! No Romney!! Go tea party rebellion!!
“But the upside is that faced with another 4 years of Obama, Congress might get serious with him and start enforcing the checks and balances that are supposed to be there.”
Why would that happen, when his profoundly destructive policies of the past three years didn’t do it?
Romney is the GOP elites answer to the TEA party movement of 2010. They got nervous over the uprising. This election is designed to pu us in our place.
They think they can get him elected without our help and forever relegate us to the ash heap of history.
By voting for Romney, you are playing right into their hands.
“Requesting the ZOT!!!”
I gotta hand it to ya, that is the most succinct opus of all time on FR!
Thank you for your support of Newt.
I wish more folks here would see that Romney is not a foregone conclusion.
He only has half the delegates he needs.
If the folks in the remaining states voting would get behind Newt, this will be a brand new horse race.
I think you are mostly right.
The two things that keep me from giving up are my children (my two Marine sons, and my beautiful daughter) and my brand-new grandson.
Progressives love it when their plans work out so easily.
One thing everyone should take away fro this election is, both parties are led by Progressives and they have the same objective. The TEA Party conservatives we sent to Congress have all been compromised with a couple exceptions. There was no attempt to defund health care by Boehner, there was no attempt to bargain with the debt ceiling, repeal of DADT passed with wide margins.
Tell me quick how voting (R) has saved the country.
That's mitt to a 't' and the GOP e.
If the powers feel the need to ban me, fine but I’ll say this: anyone who thinks that the country would be as bad off with Romney as with an America hating, affirmative action loving, Jew hating racist who is intent on pissing on the Constitution, promoting voter fraud while starting a race war, and intentionally driving gas prices thru the roof, then I DO question your judgement.
Jim, I am honestly not following what is going on here on FR over the last couple of days.
I said that the people are the ones voting for the GOP nominee and you reply that I am pushing GOP-e lies and that it is highly offensive.
What the heck?
We have the nominating process we have and (of course) it is imperfect and also (of course) the well-connected GOP players, call them "the GOP elite", have an outsized influence on the rules and the results. This is true every cycle no more or less than this year.
This cycle we had the candidates we had, and one after another they have all fallen by the wayside until now it looks like, barring a miracle, we have Romney as GOP nominee. There are six or seven people that officially declared as GOP candidates who I would choose over Romney but the simple fact is other voters in the various GOP primaries made a different choice than I would have.
I worked for Cain and then Newt but both lost. Things weren't entirely fair and above-board but the truth is both men were deeply flawed as candidates. Cain dropped out on his own accord and Newt has come in third or fourth again and again. Many more voters chose Romney than chose Newt.
Where are the "GOP-e lies" in any of this?
As a friend I am honor bound to tell you that it seems to me like you are letting your strong antipathy for Romney (which I have not refuted in any way; everything you fault him for I fault him for as well) cause you to say things that just don't make sense to some others who are genuine conservatives and have been here for a long time.
Romney vs. Obama is a terrible choice to have before us, and it is critical to ask ourselves how we got here and how we might do things better in the future. But you're saying that anyone who thinks it possible that some decent conservatives voted for Romney in the primaries, or that some decent conservatives might vote for Romney in November, is a liar. You are thereby creating a narrow and esoteric definition of "FReeper in good standing" that does not include many people who have been here for a long time, including me.
People have been trying to tell you this while avoiding the zot for days now, and it seems the situation is getting worse not better. Now might be a good time for you to take a deep breath and ask yourself what you want your amazing creation, FreeRepublic, to look like in January 2013 when we inaugurate our next President who will almost certainly be either Romney or Obama.
You are in luck because it will collapse with either of them, but Romney won't win.
...and the question remains: if Romney is the eventual nominee and “real Conservatives” in the party come out to support him, will they be treated as the enemy on Free Republic as well?
Are you so devoid of logic that you don't understand that a Republican Congress will be lulled to sleep by a president wearing their team jersey?
Do you not understand that it's better to have an avowed enemy in front of you, than an abject traitor to your cause, who only pretends to support your beliefs?
You assume that you're making a pragmatic choice, when in fact, you're only choosing which Socialist liberal is more palatable to you. The right choice in this situation, is to continue to fight back, no matter what it takes, or the eventual outcome.
If you are conservative and a Tea Party he does NOT want your vote! And if he gets it he will say you are a moderate after he wins.
I have adopted Willard’s Wisdom as my tagline:
“I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support. I am who I am.”
It doesn’t appear to bother him, it certainly doesn’t bother me.
To paraphrase Aldo the Apache, the one thing I cannot abide is bullcrap about Obama not being so bad, or frankly anyone being particularly worse than Obama.
Obama is an out and out divisive leftist who holds positions contrary to ours on everything, and who in a second term plans to further disarm this country and bring us into a full blown socialist nightmare.
Don’t be so sure that if Obama wins at the top, he won’t pull in a Congress and statehouses and governors behind him.
FR can hate Romney all it wants, but that Obama is “better” or “not so bad” in any way shape or form, that I cannot abide and no one who praises or favors Obama is a conservative.
Please, we are going to rant about Romneycare in one left wing stupid ass state (which is what Mass. is) but we are going so far as to say the actual enactor of nationwide Obamacare which is facing us all down, is not so bad????
If Romney is everything evil, then Barack Obama is out and out everything evil squared.
If the health care fraud is overturned by the Supremes, the only real accomplishment of Obama's is a boatload of debt.
Nearly everything else can be set aside with an executive order.
Political Scientist: Republicans Most Conservative They've Been In 100 Years
by Frank James
Apr 13, 2012 Keith Poole of the University of Georgia, with collaborator Howard Rosenthal of New York University, has spent decades charting the partisan ideological shifts and polarization in Congress from the 18th Century until now to get the view of how the political landscape has changed from 30,000 feet up. What they have found is that the Republican Party is the most conservative it has been a century.
Comments | ShareThis
When President Obama recently complained to news media executives about their ostensibly even-handed “pox on both of your houses” coverage of the partisan battles in Washington, it might have seemed like, well, a partisan shot from a Democratic president.
After all, his complaint was that the GOP had moved so far right, and intransigently so, that it was wrong to create a false “equivalence” by blaming both parties equally for the Washington gridlock. To a skeptic that comment, coming from a Democrat, sounded suspiciously partisan itself.
But while the president was making the kind of argument you would expect of the nation's top Democrat, he actually had the support of science well at least political science research that maps that rightward GOP shift.
Keith Poole of the University of Georgia, with his collaborator Howard Rosenthal of New York University, has spent decades charting the ideological shifts and polarization of the political parties in Congress from the 18th century until now to get the view of how the political landscape has changed from 30,000 feet up. What they have found is that the Republican Party is the most conservative it has been a century.
In a recent conversation Poole, who's viewed by other political scientists as the go-to expert on this issue, explained that the data are very clear:
“This is an entirely objective statistical procedure. The graphs just reflect what comes out of the computer. Howard Rosenthal and I, we've been working on something called Nominate. This does all the Congresses simultaneously, which allows you to study change over time.
“The short version would be since the late 1970s starting with the 1976 election in the House the Republican caucus has steadily moved to the right ever since. It's been a little more uneven in the Senate. The Senate caucuses have also moved to the right. Republicans are now furtherest to the right that they've been in 100 years.
Of course some, and not just conservative activists, will be quick to point out that Democrats also have their take-no-prisoner liberals who aren't prone to compromise on their core issues, either.
Karlyn Bowman, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institution who studies public opinion, is definitely of the pox-on-both-house camp:
“Clearly, I think both parties have moved to the extremes since I've been watching politics. I don't think there's any doubt about that. The Democratic Party has been pulled to the left and the Republican Party has been pulled to the right. Part of that is redistricting.”
Poole acknowledges that Democrats have contributed their share to the polarization of the political process, especially, he says, through their use of identity politics, appeals to race, ethnicity and gender.
Democrats have also contributed by losing House and Senate seats in the South where moderate Democrats have been replaced by Republicans. Meanwhile, moderate Republicans have continued to depart the scene, with Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine being just the latest.
Buttressing a point that Obama has sometimes made, this loss of moderates and further rightward movement by congressional Republicans would have been a challenge to navigate for even the biggest conservative hero of modern times, President Ronald Reagan. Poole said:
“Ronald Reagan was so successful because he made all these deals with these huge blocks of moderate legislators. That's why he had overwhelming majorities for the 81 tax cut, the 82 tax increase, where they had to go back and adjust the tax bill in 82 and the Social Security fix in 83. Then in 86 you had Simpson Mazzoli, which included amnesty and tax simplification. All that stuff passed with very large majorities. You cannot imagine anything like that happening now. Which is why the country is really in the tank.
“There's a lot of blame to go around. It doesn't look like there's any resolution of this anytime soon.”
That said, Poole says the data are hard to deny; the polarization is largely due to how far and relatively quickly Republicans have shifted to the right end of the ideological spectrum. And he faults leaders of both parties for allowing the nation to get into a fiscal morass in which government spending on health care is unsustainable:
“It is true that the Republicans have moved further to the right than the Democrats have moved to the left. That's absolutely true.
“On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be much impetus on the part of the leadership of either political party to really do something serious about our budget crisis. I doubt very seriously we'll see much improvement.
“People forget how utterly irresponsible our political leadership has been for the last 30 years. ... The current political class of the U.S. just isn't in the same league as Truman and Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson. You just don't have that kind of leadership now, just when we need it.
This isn't meant as a knock on Obama, Poole said. But he's not very optimistic about what an Obama second term would bring:
“The likely outcome of the election is that it's a very close victory by President Obama, the Republicans hold the House and may come within an eyelash of taking the Senate. I could see a 50-50 Senate. So good luck. After $2 billion gets spent on federal elections at all levels, how bitter will the atmosphere will be in January 2013? We're really up the creek.”
From Eisenhower to the near present much of the party base would go along with a ‘moderate centrist’ candidate to slow the spread of collectivism by keeping the White House out of Dem hands. None of the GOP candidates elected had any expectation or desire to make government smaller other than Reagan. He didn't have the votes in Congress to do it. The GOP was not nearly as conservative as it is today. The professional hacks still think the party looks like it did in 1960 or 68. Heavily conservative but with a strong ‘moderate’ presence. The ‘moderates’ also tended to be the people with more elite pretensions and money and were conservative only on tax policy. That has changed in the last 8/10 years. The majority of Repus hate government and want it smaller now and probably half are also social conservatives. A group the party hacks cannot believe exist in such numbers and will not view with anything but hatred. If Romney wins or loses this condition will not change. If he wins the big story the LMS will lie about is the internal war to control the administration and the party ‘regulars’. If he loses the big story will be the blood purge at many state levels directed at the party ‘establishment’. Either way the long war for the GOP will continue. But the conservatives are gradually prevailing. A story no one has reported other than this of all things NPR report.