Not an adequate excuse at all. That's akin to a German Nazi soldier saying they were "just following orders." Look at Newt or Allen West. When they get redistricted into a liberal district, they don't change their policies in order to hold onto power for selfish reasons, they get up and move their home to a conservative district and run there. They are interested in promoting conservative policies. It wouldn't make any sense to them to change their principles just so they could hold onto their title.
Everything we know about Mitt says he was VERY happy promoting the policies he promoted in Massachusetts, not that he was unhappily caving in to someone else's demands.
Because I believe that Mitt's type of "leadership" will lead to a Democrat revolution in Congress in 2014 and a new Democrat presidency in 2016, I think it's bad strategy to vote for him. The Democrats are in such a bad position in Congress this year that I don't think they can win Congress even if Obama wins. And if Obama wins, Tea Partiers will show up big in 2014 to vote in more conservatives to oppose him. Then we get another chance to elect a conservative president in 2016.
[[Look at Newt or Allen West. When they get redistricted into a liberal district, they don’t change their policies in order to hold onto power for selfish reasons, they get up and move their home to a conservative district and run there.]]
I woudl love it IF Newt were the nominee- you have no idea how much I don’t want romeny to be our only chance against obama- but again- it is what it is- And Yes, I agree with you that romeny did sell his soul in order to govern in mass- however, Are we to beleive he didn’t pass ANY conservative measures in office at all? Some is better than none- especially in a state that is really really liberal-
[[Because I believe that Mitt’s type of “leadership” will lead to a Democrat revolution in Congress in 2014 and a new Democrat presidency in 2016, I think it’s bad strategy to vote for him]]
I beleive it’s an even worse strategy to have obama in for 4 more years- it will be too damaging to this country- He has alreadty stated his intentions when he is ‘unleashed’ when he ‘gets reelected’ in his own words-
We have seen obama snjub his nose at the constitution, the supreme court, the church- business etc etc etc- and again, we only saw the tip of the iceberg as he ‘tested the waters’ to see how far he could push- IF reelected he will show outright contempt for constution, for the limited power of hte presidency- he will ignore his limits and do whatever hte hell he likes, and noone will try to stop him because it will come slowly and in pieces so that people aren;t aware their rights have been undone- Her’s a dangerous man- very dan gerous-
[[Then we get another chance to elect a conservative president in 2016.]]
Says who? it will be just more of the same- the gop will make sure some other dolt gets the nomination, and conservatkives will AGAIN refuse to vote for them- on and on it will go- UNLESS the teaparty can bring soething to the table- they had 3 years to do so, and all we really got was a woman whom the media knw they could defeat easily- (I’m not discounting hte great work the tea party did in getrting governors and senators elected who are truly better conservatives than what was in there- but in the presidential candidate department, they haven’;t got a good track record. Yes Sarah woudl have been the much betterchoice, but the media was not goign to allow her to win- The media decides who the nominees will be- and all to often, the choices are not very good- but we have to trry to make hte best of it
I wish God would give usw good and righteous kings so that our country could properly prosper again, but He isn’t, all we have is a poor choice to choose from- but in my mind, while it stinks, it’s still better than the blatant radical i nhtere right now