Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Opus Time
Vanity Opus

Posted on 04/17/2012 4:47:30 PM PDT by Williams

Well it's been about 13 years forgot my initial sign in name, so pretty much from the beginning.

Never wanted to write a Free Republic Opus, love reading news stories here and commenting every day.

Would rather not go out in anger seems pointless.

Then today the owner of the site called me a RINO (I'm not), surrender monkey (not) and told me to write my opus and get out.

My sin was fighting with someone who suggested Obama losing in the latest poll is "bad news".

I could list all the insanity of what is going on here. I've tried to approach Jim Robinson in email to gently suggest the problems we are facing. It's clear from that he is not interested in discussing and resolving anything, which is a shame.

But what kind of man, American, conservative will I be if I worry more about losing my 12 year old screen name versus standing up to people who are espousing the advisability of reelecting Barack Hussein Obama, and yes if I fail to stand up to the owner of a site for calling me a liberal when I am a proud conservative?

What Jim Robinson is doing cannot work because first of all he is NOT attacking the posters who say it is best to reelect Obama. He's offended by anyone who says he is thereby supporting Obama. But he doesn't mind calling us names when we attack the pro Obamas.

OK folks, it's not going to work. You can't really oppose Obama's reelection if you may also oppose the republican's election.

Free Republic has become a house divided against itself and it cannot stand.

I'm a conservative I love my country, I have to wish away to the cornfield anyone who would assist in the reelection of Obama, from whatever misguided motivations.

I stand with Dick Cheney. The other day I had to fight with someone disparaging Cheney here. They were not criticized by the owner.

Jim Robinson owes me an apology. Not planning on getting one. The sad fact is I am not writing this because I'm offended. It's because I want to no longer assist here in the destruction of my country by those who will, to varying degrees, assist in Obama's reelection.

Six or seven liberals on the Supreme Court? Maybe atomic destruction down the pike after our disarmament. Israel destroyed. 2nd Amendment neutered. Obamacare used to deny people medical care based on age and political beliefs. Racial strife. A welfare socialist state. US attorneys going after republicans.

My wife is a cancer survivor who reasonably fears that in the future they will deny her care because she is a registered republican. And she's no RINO, she hates Obama and she won't read Free Republic stories anymore because of what is going on here.

We have a real country and real lives out here that go beyond Jim Robinson's ill advised name calling against sincere conservatives who dare to disagree with him.

So F anyone who calls me a RINO for standing with Dick Cheney and against Barack Obama. I hate RINO's and I despise misguided so called conservatives who do anything to reelect Obama.

13 years, but it's nothing when put to the wall on my beliefs against the left wing democrat party. I have too many mirrors to look in. The people here who are every day posting that it will be best to reelect Obama, should be thrown off. Instead, well...

It's over.

TOPICS: Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: aobtd; defeatobama; fourmoreyears; goodfreepergone; jimrobinson; nooooooo; opus; suicidepill
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 561-564 next last
To: Williams

Things don’t change when people walk away. Especially since most people don’t want anything to change to begin with, and are happy the irritants are leaving.

Lots of people walking away though. Seems premature to me — Gingrich isn’t out of the race yet. No point in falling on a sword before there is no choice.

181 posted on 04/17/2012 7:15:11 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

The system is a one party system of two Socialist parties. If you want to pee in the wind, have at it. Mittens won’t fix the problem.

182 posted on 04/17/2012 7:15:34 PM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

OK, Gore would have been worse than Bush. No argument. So what’s the question?

183 posted on 04/17/2012 7:17:21 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

As a matter of logic and principle Charles, please explain in detail how voting for a ‘Republican’ candidate who opposes the Republican party platform does not make both of you RINOS by the accepted definition of the term.

I’ll wait. This ought to be good so take your time.

184 posted on 04/17/2012 7:18:09 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

It is premature (Gingrich is still in the race), but given what both of those people have said in the past, it seems rude and condescending to write in the name of a person who will by that time have urged you to vote for someone else.

Why not vote for a minor candidate who is on the ballot and actively seeking your vote, rather than mocking someone who will have by that time endorsed a different person. “I respect you so much I want you to be President, and disrepect you so much I will ignore who you endorse”.

But like I say, it’s premature — we can still support Gingrich, since he’s still a candidate.

As to your comments about “slower death”, I’d argue the point but we are not allowed to discuss that in this forum.

185 posted on 04/17/2012 7:19:23 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta
I won't vote for a liberal whether a (D) or an (R). I'm a conservative. And I have to vote for a conservative.

Blame the GOP-E for changing the rules and playing other dirty tricks to push your boy. If they put up a conservative, I'll vote for her.


186 posted on 04/17/2012 7:20:17 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
"I have seen no threads supporting Obama"

There will be one of two people president next year, Obama or Romney. No amount of bluster from anyone on this site can change that. An anti-Romney thread is a pro-Obama thread.

187 posted on 04/17/2012 7:21:37 PM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
GeronL: "After you throw away your principles and conservatism to elect Romney, then what? You will have no power to move him to the right, you’ve just proven you’ll vote for anything they put on the ballot with an R, you will have no sway."

Good point. That's what's wrong with Mark Levin's approach. He's said all along that he'd vote for the nominee. So Romney goes scorched earth on the conservatives knowing that people like Mark Levin are going to vote for him no matter what. As a strategy, it's foolish to tell your political enemy, in advance, you'll support him if he manages to win the nomination. You lose any leverage you might have had.

In regards to moving Romney right, that's more foolishness. Our only leverage over Mitt Romney is our votes. John McCain has proven that. That's why he only runs to the right every six years and thumbs his nose at us the rest. We have no sway over Juan McPain, and we won't have any sway over a Romney administration. He'll do what he wants within the Washington DC power structure that exists, and that isn't likely to be conservative (I'm thinking a Democrat/RINO coalition).

188 posted on 04/17/2012 7:21:50 PM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Sorry, there’s just no honorable justification for voting for a demonstrated liberal/Socialist like Mitt Romney - no matter what the pretext is.

I can think of a justification. I believe that Obama and Romney will *both* lead this nation to total ruin. In fact, I think total ruin is inevitable based on the demographics.

However, I believe Romney will get us there more slowly - which buys me just a little more time to better prepare.

189 posted on 04/17/2012 7:24:41 PM PDT by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

What many 'conservatives' fail to understand is that we are no longer choosing between one party or the other in this alleged 'two party system', oh the party structures are there, and we see the (D) vs (R) facade time after time, but the statists that have set up permanent residence in Washington belong in truth to NO party and have no allegiance at all, except to whatever it takes to preserve their own personal political power. It is the essence of 'McCainism', that putrid practice of 'reaching across the aisle' while waving the fecal banner of 'bipartisanship' in hopes that their self serving deeds are not seen for what they are, a continuning betrayal of We The People, the voters who put them there in the first place.

The GOP long ago ceased to be any sort of true 'opposition' party to the 'Rats, it's all just a game with their faux political adversaries, who they will rant and rave against when the C-SPAN cameras are running, and then afterwards head to the cocktail lounges and the golf courses and clink their glasses, and break bread with their foul 'colleagues'.

It is institutional corruption of the highest order.

And as for this election in November?

The waiter has approached our table, handed us our menus, and informed us that the only two items available today, are the salmonella, and the botulism, which would we prefer?

Uh uh, not this time. That waiter is getting a fist in his ugly face, and his teeth bouncing off the floor.
190 posted on 04/17/2012 7:26:31 PM PDT by mkjessup (Finley Peter Dunne- "Politics ain't beanbag")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage

Both candidates are Liberals. Your logic is flawed. It’s an anti-Liberal thread.

191 posted on 04/17/2012 7:27:40 PM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio; TigersEye
[TigersEye:]If the GOPe doesn’t get the votes they potentially could have gotten they will at least get the message that their candidate didn’t appeal to many voters.

If we're relying on post-election tallies of protest votes to make the GOP turn right, we're looking at a Leftist control of the White House for a couple of decades. I understand the anger, but it seems slight consolation in exchange for seeing Obama with four more years to destroy America.

That is already in the bag. Romney is dead-man-walking already. Do you REALLY think that the Christian Right is going to set aside the bare fact that Romney is and has been a flaming pro-choice, pro-homo advocate? Do you really expect them to vote for Romney-abortion over Obama-abortion? I can THOROUGHLY predict that Romney is going to lose just as big as McStain did. Without the Christians, NO Republican wins, PERIOD. They have been trying that "!UP! the middle" crap for years. If Romney winds up the candidate, all is lost... The only chance at a win is to hoist up a 3rd party candidate.

192 posted on 04/17/2012 7:28:11 PM PDT by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: VRWC For Truth
"You assume the GOP is interested in turning right There is no evidence past, present, or future that this is so."

...all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Yeah, it's happened, but it's been awhile.

193 posted on 04/17/2012 7:28:24 PM PDT by optiguy (Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them.----- Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: The Duke

So its the safe choice?

From Wikiquote...

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

This was written by Franklin, within quotation marks but is generally accept as his original thought, sometime shortly before February 17, 1775 as part of his notes for a proposition at the Pennsylvania Assembly, as published in Memoirs of the life and writings of Benjamin Franklin (1818).

194 posted on 04/17/2012 7:29:24 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

I like how you said that — much better than how others have suggested.

Nobody should be castigated for refusing to vote for a candidate they don’t support. And contrary to what others have said here, I believe there are people here who, on principle, would rather allow Obama to win re-election than to allow Romney to be President.

What I don’t know is why so many people want to deny that is what they believe. It is a principled position, and people should stand up for their principles, not try to deny them. If you oppose Romney, oppose him, and proudly admit that you are so sure of your beliefs that you would rather have Obama be president.

The only people that annoy me are those who suggest that they can oppose Romney, and still “oppose Obama”, as if there is some way to end up with neither man being President. I wish there was — that was the point of this entire primary, to get a republican nominee that was NOT ROMNEY (a lot of people forgot that, and spent the entire nomination attacking other candidates trying to get their “favorite” elected). And there is still a technical chance that Gingrich will be our nominee, and while that is possible, it makes sense for people to argue that they will never vote Romney, because that might make people vote Gingrich.

But if Romney is the republican nominee, people will have a choice to make — Romney or Obama — and should be honest about that choice.

195 posted on 04/17/2012 7:31:44 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: VRWC For Truth
You assume the GOP is interested in turning right There is no evidence past, present, or future that this is so.

How does that jibe with the results in 2010, especially in the state legislatures?

The only hope for Conservatism lies in the GOP - no third party will see electoral success in our lifetimes. If a strong GOP is needed for Conservatism to survive, then we have to first stop Obama, or the GOP will splinter and we will spend decades in the wilderness.

We've seen this before - the Taft/Roosevelt split gave us Wilson, and look at how well that turned out.

196 posted on 04/17/2012 7:31:54 PM PDT by TonyInOhio (Arm yourselves, and be ye men of valour)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup

Aye, the game is rigged. Time for a new game ... Constitution 101.

197 posted on 04/17/2012 7:32:01 PM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Romney is George Washington.

Romney is also rich.

According to this website, Washington was the second richest president, behind the Kennedy wealth.

Romney's wealth is going to be used against him, but he can point to the Kennedy wealth as a comparison. He should leave Washington to stand apart from the rest of the presidents.

I'm not saying that you said anything, but I was interested in your reference to other sites that made the comparison. I'm sure an opus is not the best place to pursue this, but it's here that I first saw it, and I can search for this later if I want to reuse the reference.


198 posted on 04/17/2012 7:33:03 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: John W

Neither of those two abortionist statists that’s for sure. Straight conservative down ticket!!

199 posted on 04/17/2012 7:33:18 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (There's no crying in rebellion!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: billys kid
Newt’s still in the game

Bears repeating.

200 posted on 04/17/2012 7:34:51 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 561-564 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