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

Skip to comments.

Where Do Conservatives Go Now? Part 2 (Donít Get Suckered into Supporting the Republican Party)
Conservative HQ ^ | 19 Apr 12 | Richard A. Viguerie

Posted on 04/20/2012 8:09:50 AM PDT by xzins

Fourth, Remember the Difference Between Republicans and Conservatives.

Conservatives look at the endorsements Mitt Romney has garnered from such establishment figures as former President George H.W. Bush and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, and most importantly from business-as-usual Washington insiders, such as lobbyist Ed Gillespie, and they see advocates of positions they often opposed, not friends of the transformational agenda that won the Tea Party wave election of 2010.

Surveying Romney’s record and agenda, and most importantly the people he is likely to bring to Washington to implement his agenda, movement conservatives see little likelihood a Romney administration will differ from a Bush administration, or a McCain administration, or a Dole or Ford administration.

This is why conservatives remain so deeply skeptical of Mitt Romney’s candidacy for President. They look at his record as Governor of Massachusetts and the policies he espouses and see no commitment to the kind of transformational change the conservative movement has been working for the past 50 years to achieve.

Republican Party insiders still can’t come to grips with the reality that the rebellion of the small government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party is as much a rejection of their stewardship of the government – the earmarks and massive spending and debt of the Bush years – as it is a rejection of Obamacare and Obamanomics.

Let’s be quite clear – there is a difference between Republicans and conservatives. The goal of the Republican political party is to elect its candidates to control the levers of government power. Conservatives should not get so swept-up in the Republican Party’s campaign for power, that they loose sight of the fact that the goal of the conservative movement is to hold the government to constitutional principles, no matter what political party is in power, and in the process rejuvenate our society and culture.

Fifth, Don’t Get Suckered into Supporting the Republican Party.

If the difference between conservatives and Republicans is based in the conservative movement’s commitment to holding the government to constitutional principles, no matter which Party is in power, then one of the most important things conservatives can do is to support organizations that are committed to that same goal.

This also means declining to support organizations, including the national, state and local Republican Parties if they are not committed to holding the government to constitutional principles.

The folly of conservatives supporting the Republican National Committee, and many state Republican Party committees was made readily apparent during the presidential primary. In state after state the establishment GOP did its best to thwart the will of the grassroots conservative voters by using its power to tip the scales toward Mitt Romney to the disadvantage of the conservative candidates in the race.

In the same vein the Republican National Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have become virtual incumbent protection rackets – appearing to sell influence and access in return for donations to keep incumbent members of Congress in power.

Thanks in part to the ability of the new and alternative media, especially the internet, to empower grassroots activists it is now possible to bypass the establishment Republican Party. There are now dozens of sound organizations committed to constitutional conservative principles that are doing everything from training volunteers in grassroots campaign techniques to recruiting and training conservative candidates to run for Congress and their state legislatures.

Just because an organization has conservative in its name doesn’t mean the organization is actually conservative – especially if it is headquartered in Washington DC. Too many Washington-based organizations, even ones that began with the intention of fostering conservative government, have become part of the inside-the-Beltway Republican establishment.

Very often the best organizations to support are not the state parties and national committees, but the local groups; County Republican Committees and Tea Party organizations who share our values and are doing the hard work to elect conservative candidates to office up and down the ballot. By supporting these local organizations, which are always struggling to raise money, it is possible to know their leadership, know whether or not they share our values and determine whether they are accountable and effective.

During the Bush – Hastert – Frist years too many Washington-based policy organizations sold their souls for a few tickets to the White House Christmas party or a seat at the State of the Union Address. They failed in the real test of whether they were effective advocates of conservative policy – holding the government to constitutional principles, no matter which Party is in power.

Don’t get suckered into supporting the Republican Party’s incumbent protection racket. Donate only to small government constitutional conservative organizations and committees dedicated to holding the government to constitutional principles, no matter which Party is in power, and electing small government constitutional conservatives to office. Avoid establishment Republican-oriented organizations and Party committees that don’t hew to conservative principles, and work against conservative candidates and blindly support Republican incumbents even when they oppose conservative policies.

Sixth, It’s the Primaries, Stupid – Support Small Government, Constitutional Conservative Candidates

If 2012 is another big wave election, like 2010, but it sweeps into office the usual big-government, establishment Republicans, then we will have missed the opportunity of a lifetime.

Supporting small government, constitutional conservatives, no matter how far down the ballot they are is crucial to our long-term success, and running for any office, no matter how far down the ballot, is worthy of your efforts.

If constitutional conservatives are to govern America, we must not only elect a President and a Congress, but also city council members, school board members, state legislators, Secretaries of State, Lt. Governors, etc.

Of course, there are many good candidates already running who are with the Tea Party movement. However, the vast majority of positions on the ballot this year do not have small government constitutional conservatives running, and many will have incumbents who have not faced a contest in years.

We who want constitutional, small-government should be running candidates even when it appears they have little or no chance of victory. The mistake of assuming good candidates will emerge from the regular party process does not work most of the time because the establishment Republican Party has no real interest in the kind of transformational change sought by conservatives.

Do you really trust Party leaders like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner to build a Republican majority of small government constitutional conservatives? If we leave it to the national congressional and Party leadership to recruit the candidates we will end-up with a Congress just like them; incumbents such as Bob Bennett and establishment figures such as Charlie Crist, and Trey Grayson.

When making decisions about where to put their financial support, conservatives should remember that if the national Republican committees had their way, such now-stalwart conservative Senators as Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Mike Lee would never have been elected.

The only time we are guaranteed to lose is when we don’t compete. In today’s volatile political environment, no establishment candidate is truly safe. The American people want the chance to take out the big-government, establishment politicians; put your money and your hard work directly behind those candidates who are committed to small government, constitutional principles.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: conservative; elections; establishment; gop; rejectromney; rncc; romney; romneytruthfile; smallgovernment; teaparty; viguerie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-227 next last
To: Turbo Pig
By voting for Romney, you prove to the GOP that you will abandon your conservative principles, and they can count on your vote for whatever crap liberal they push. That's called enabling. Just like the abused wife that says: "This time will be different".

Forget it. Not only will I not vote for Romney, I will actively campaign against him if he gets the nomination.

/johnny

101 posted on 04/20/2012 1:17:57 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

WHAT happened to McKenna?


102 posted on 04/20/2012 1:17:57 PM PDT by goodnesswins (2012..."We mutually pledge our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: mo
A Right leaning/Conservative Congress can easily remain united behind an Obama re-election....whereas the same Congress will be sliced and diced by the RINOS if Romney is in the White House.

Finally....someone else who clearly understands the dynamics at work here. Thank you!

103 posted on 04/20/2012 1:18:10 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway
Like a laser...this must be the focus for now. The dangerous boy socialist must go!

Excellent! Let's replace him with his near-identical twin, who a Republican Congress will simply roll over and beg for. Brilliant!

Lord Soros thanks you!

104 posted on 04/20/2012 1:20:50 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: elpadre
if conservatives are the instruments causing Obama to have four more years, then that is the end of conservatism in the USA as a viable political entity.

Are you then suggesting that we throw our support behind a man who wears our uniform, but whose record in office is virtually indistinguishable from any liberal Democrat's?

If anything will destroy conservatism in America, that would be it.

105 posted on 04/20/2012 1:24:37 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Thanks ItsAHoot. Your compliment was much appreciated.


106 posted on 04/20/2012 1:24:37 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Okay, now lets see if the RNC, Rove, and Card can get him elected without their core base. Game on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
How is a liberal with a leftwing record going to offer himself as a clear choice when the opponent is a Marxist? Romney simply cannot run on his record, and saying "Well, at least I'm not Obama" won't cut it. And even if he does win, you expect Boehner and the GOP-e to hold his feet to the fire? Really??



107 posted on 04/20/2012 1:27:56 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway
Like a laser...this must be the focus for now. The dangerous boy socialist must go!

Is it in conservatives' nature to not only be terrible at long-term thinking, but to not even try? The Muslims and the commies specialize in long-term thinking. Either step up to the plate or look forward to long-term defeat coming sooner than you think.

108 posted on 04/20/2012 1:29:06 PM PDT by JediJones (From the makers of Romney, Bloomberg/Schwarzenegger 2016. Because the GOP can never go too far left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: arrdon
I have a grand idea; why don’t you half-wits go out and FRAGMENT THE VOTE AGAIN so we can put this Commie POS back in office for another four years! Will that make you feel like you got even?

"If we're going to have a Socialist in the White House, then by George, let him be OUR Socialist!"

rolling eyes...

109 posted on 04/20/2012 1:32:24 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

What a terrific post. Please consider re-posting it as a separate thread. You’ve ably made the case that so many of us are trying to make here.

Supporting the Republican Socialist over the Democrat Socialist only strengthens Socialism in our government, and does inestimable damage to conservative/patriotic ideals.


110 posted on 04/20/2012 1:43:03 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: arrdon
I do and will campaign against Romney. Now and after the primary if he takes the nomination.

Blame the GOP-E and complicit media for their dirty tricks, rule changes, and bashing conservatives.

You do know that if Romney gets the nod, the media will unleash their hounds and crush him, as well.

/johnny

111 posted on 04/20/2012 1:45:52 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne; onyx; TheOldLady; Norm Lenhart; caww; JoeProBono; trisham; RedMDer; greyfoxx39; ...
Ping to post 38.

We have been operating under the rule of "Lesser of Two Evils" for decades. I have agreed with it. I now stop to ask folks, has our nation grown stronger over those decades? At some point we have to be honest with ourselves. For me, the answer is a clear, "No."

112 posted on 04/20/2012 1:51:13 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Take a look at this election cycle, and realize it only gets worse from here if Romney can get elected without the Conservative vote.

IMO, that has been the goal of the GOP establishment all along. I think they view the far left position of Obama as an opportunity to give us a slightly left candidate and get him elected, by relying on the weaknesses of Obama, rather than through the support of conservatives.

The Republican Party has sent a message to conservatives that they don't need our vote, and I intend to abide by that message.

By the way, your analysis is top notch. However, I think 2012 may be closer to your 2020 graph than many here want to admit.

113 posted on 04/20/2012 1:59:55 PM PDT by CharacterCounts (A vote for the lesser of two evils only insures the triumph of evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: xzins

It has NEVER been the case where conservatism gains more when Republicans lose. If Republicans were to lose in 2012 (they aren’t, Obama is) all that would achieve is to make the Republican party MORE moderate in 2016, not less. Winning is a habit.


114 posted on 04/20/2012 2:03:14 PM PDT by Dragonspirit (Always remember President Token won only by defecting on his CFR pledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

You’ve got mail...


115 posted on 04/20/2012 2:03:21 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Okay, now lets see if the RNC, Rove, and Card can get him elected without their core base. Game on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

slightly left - should have been slightly less left.


116 posted on 04/20/2012 2:07:36 PM PDT by CharacterCounts (A vote for the lesser of two evils only insures the triumph of evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: arrdon

When did you lose the principles you imply you have by claiming that you are a Conservative? Or did you ever have any principles to lose? Or is the you claiming to be a Conservate a chrade?


117 posted on 04/20/2012 2:11:12 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; DoughtyOne
Thanks for the ping, Windflier.

Excellent post, Doughty One.

118 posted on 04/20/2012 2:11:56 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Thanks for the discussion. I know some of this is rather pointed, but I'm not upset with you. I'm just frustrated by what we are continually faced with every four years. I want it to stop.

Thank you as well. It is unfortunate that conservatives who are ultimately all on the same side often can't seem to disagree reasonably over what amounts to a difference in strategy rather than a difference in principle.

I'm actually frustrated by those who chose not to run. He was not a perfect candidate, but Mitch Daniels was certainly more conservative than Romney, and right on all the issues even if he generally eschews red-meat rhetoric.

I'm just crossing my fingers that we make it to 2016 without things going beyond repair, when we'll hopefully have a much more conservative candidate.

119 posted on 04/20/2012 2:16:35 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

Thanks for your thoughts. I agree with your premise of trotting out a guy ‘just not as bad’ as the guy running for the Dems.

Let’s hope you’re wrong about the 2012 vs 2020 thing. I’m not convinced of that.

D1


120 posted on 04/20/2012 2:29:58 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Okay, now lets see if the RNC, Rove, and Card can get him elected without their core base. Game on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

Thanks for your thoughts. I agree with your premise of trotting out a guy ‘just not as bad’ as the guy running for the Dems.

(I phrased this next comment poorly)

Let’s hope you’re wrong about the 2012 vs 2020 thing. I’m not convinced of that. Meant that I’m not convinced you are wrong,

D1


121 posted on 04/20/2012 2:31:54 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Okay, now lets see if the RNC, Rove, and Card can get him elected without their core base. Game on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: trisham

Thank you Trisham. I appreciate it.


122 posted on 04/20/2012 2:33:21 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Okay, now lets see if the RNC, Rove, and Card can get him elected without their core base. Game on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Memories of Newt as Speaker of the House vs Clinton.


123 posted on 04/20/2012 2:51:38 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin
Thanks for the discussion. I know some of this is rather pointed, but I'm not upset with you. I'm just frustrated by what we are continually faced with every four years. I want it to stop.

Thank you as well. It is unfortunate that conservatives who are ultimately all on the same side often can't seem to disagree reasonably over what amounts to a difference in strategy rather than a difference in principle.  I generally agree with that, but it's not entirely off base to question where some advocacies germinate from.  If my perception is that a advocated policy might further the desires of Leftists in my own party vs the Leftists in another party, it isn't all that unreasoned to come to the conclusion that Leftists are still going to be the benificiary of that advocacy.  That doesn't mean the advocate realizes the ramifications of everything his advocacy may support in the long run.  And then again, it doesn't mean they don't.

I'm actually frustrated by those who chose not to run. He was not a perfect candidate, but Mitch Daniels was certainly more conservative than Romney, and right on all the issues even if he generally eschews red-meat rhetoric.  I share some of that frustration, but we don't know all things about people.  He may have a good reason for not wanting to run.

I'm just crossing my fingers that we make it to 2016 without things going beyond repair, when we'll hopefully have a much more conservative candidate.  Frankly, I'd like to see a majority enter the Republican Convention this year demanding the whole thing be tossed out on it's ear, and someone new be drafted.  IMO, that's the greatest most patriotic thing that Santorum and Gingrich could do right now.  They should form an exploratory committee and come up with a strategy and some names.  Sorry Newt, no way...  You had your chance and it wasn't you.

Failing that, we have got to start a Conservative coalition that will end the Republican party's lock on the nomination process.  It's past time for a civil war in the Republican party.


124 posted on 04/20/2012 2:59:36 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Okay, now lets see if the RNC, Rove, and Card can get him elected without their core base. Game on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Turbo Pig
You make do with the hand you are dealt.

Yeah, that louse, Benedict Arnold, is all we've got left....sigh. I guess we'll just have to vote for him and hope for better luck next time.

125 posted on 04/20/2012 3:05:52 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: hattend
I dislike Romney but he is better than another Obama term.

You can't make the case that "Romney is better than Obama" if you judge him solely on his record, which is indistinguishable from any liberal Democrat's.

Vote for that snake oil salesman if you must, but just know that he will become the de facto leader of the Republican party, and a Republican dominated Congress will not oppose his liberal agenda with anywhere near the force that they'd lock arms in opposition against Obama.

In fact, if history is any guide (GWB), the Congress will roll over for him like a puppy.

Take a good hard look at those dynamics and ask yourself which scenario is preferable.

126 posted on 04/20/2012 3:15:08 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Marguerite; caww; true believer forever

The republicans are in a good position to take control of the senate. IF we maintain control of the house and gain in the senate it will be a win (if the republicans stick to conservative strengths) without Romney. Conservatives could block Obama and the dems legislation. I say fight for the republicans in your states and districts but do not cave to the republican establishment in their selection of Romney.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/race-ratings/85743-race-ratings

SENATE

Democratic Seats (23)

Safe Democratic: (8)
Feinstein (Calif.)
Carper (Del.)
Cardin (Md.)
Klobuchar (Minn.)
Menendez (N.J.)
Gillibrand (N.Y.)
Whitehouse (R.I.)
Sanders (Vt.)

Likely Democratic: (6)
Lieberman (Conn.) - OPEN
Akaka (Hawaii) - OPEN
Stabenow (Mich.)
Casey (Pa.)
Cantwell (Wash.)
Kohl (Wis.)

Lean Democratic: (4)
Nelson (Fla.)
McCaskill (Mo.)
Brown (Ohio)
Manchin (W.Va.)

Toss-up: (5)
Tester (Mont.)
Nelson (Neb.)
Bingaman (N.M.) - OPEN
Conrad (N.D.) - OPEN
Webb (Va.) - OPEN


Republican Seats (10)

Safe Republican: (5)
Lugar (Ind.)
Wicker (Miss.)
Corker (Tenn.)
Hatch (Utah)
Barrasso (Wy.)

Likely Republican: (3)
Kyl (Ariz.) - OPEN
Snowe (Maine)
Hutchison (Texas) - OPEN

Lean Republican: (0)

Toss-up: (2)
Brown (Mass.)
Ensign (Nev.)

HOUSE

Democratic Seats (27)

Races To Watch:(3)
Carnahan (Mo.-03)
Wu (Ore.-01)
Rahall (W.Va.-3)
Toss-up: (5)
Barrow (Ga.-12)
Kissell (N.C.-08)
Heinrich (N.M.-01)
Sutton (Ohio-13)
Altmire (Pa.-04)

Lean Democratic: (10)
McNerney (Calif.-11)
Donnelly (Ind.-2)
Chandler (Ky.-06)
Peters (Mich.-09)
McIntyre (N.C.-07)
Bishop (N.Y.-01)
Owens (N.Y.-23)
Schrader (Ore.-05)
Matheson (Utah-02)
Connolly (Va.-02)

Likely Democratic: (9)
Giffords (Ariz.-08)
Himes (Conn.-04)
C. Murphy (Conn.-05) - OPEN
Loebsack (Iowa-02)
Boswell (Iowa-03)
Peters (Mich.-09)
Walz (Minn.-01)
Shuler (N.C.-11)
Critz (Pa.-12)


Republican Seats (27)

Races to Watch: (4)
Crawford (Ark.-01)
Heck (Nev.-03)
Rigell (Va.02)
Hurt (Va.-5)

Toss-up: (10)
West (Fla.-22)
Walsh (Ill.-08)
Dold (Ill.-10)
Schilling (Ill.-17)
Buerkle (N.Y.-25)
B. Johnson (Ohio-06)
Fitzpatrick (Pa.-08)
Barletta (Pa.-11)
Duffy (Wis.-07)
Farenthold (Texas-27)

Lean Republican: (8)
Ellmers (N.C.-02)
Rivera (Fla.-25)
Bass (N.H.-02)
Grimm (N.Y.-13)
Cravaack (Minn.-08)
Rehberg (Mont.-AL) - OPEN
Runyan (N.J.-03)
Canseco (Texas-23)

Likely Republican: (5)
Berg (N.D.-AL)
Pearce (N.M.-01)
Lee (N.Y.-26) - OPEN
Herrera Beutler (Wash.-03)
McKinley (W.Va.-01)


127 posted on 04/20/2012 3:18:32 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mo
A Right leaning/Conservative Congress can easily remain united behind an Obama re-election....whereas the same Congress will be sliced and diced by the RINOS if Romney is in the White House.

I am glad others see this. Romney and Obama are both bad for the country. Romney will get his agenda pushed through because he will have both Democrats and RINOs in Congress supporting him, and he will appoint the same types of people that he surrounded himself with as Governor. We are in a bad shape - both Romney and Obama want to take us to socialism, one just wants to do it a little slower.
128 posted on 04/20/2012 3:25:42 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
You can't make the case that "Romney is better than Obama" if you judge him solely on his record

I'm judging Obama's record.

Who are you voting for?

129 posted on 04/20/2012 3:28:54 PM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Excellent, DoughtOne. Thank you.


130 posted on 04/20/2012 3:30:06 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (I do not expect the (FR) house to fall - but I do expect it will cease to be divided-Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I was done with the big insiders party years ago, when I realized the Rs and Ds are all riding in the same limo.

How many times can Americans be lied to and BS’d?

America needed a 2nd party since Bush’s second term.


131 posted on 04/20/2012 3:30:20 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Obama will destroy this nation even with A Republican Congress. He will appoint far lefties to the courts, he will dismantle our national defense, he will turn every department into a center of socialist activism, he will increase the number in poverty thereby securing his base, he will destroy small businesses in favor of large corporations who depend on government largess, he will make the US subservient to the UN, and on and on. Give him another four years, and the USA will truly be a third world nation, regardless of who has the House and Senate. Anyone who supports Obama because they don't like Romney is acting against the best interests of the nation and selling our kids into a life of misery.

Romney may not be all that we want but he will do none of the above. And, with a strong conservative Congress he will more than likely follow suit IMO

I will enthusiastically support whomever the Republican nominee is and I pray everyone on FR will do the same.

132 posted on 04/20/2012 3:35:05 PM PDT by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; DoughtyOne

Thanks very much for the ping to D-1’s excellent post.

This ugly primary isn’t yet over. Romney hasn’t yet successfully bought the nomination he’s insatiably lusting for, but he’s close and he’s managed to get some nationally known TEA Party elected officer holders to support him in a call for “Party unity.”

This is not the time for “Party unity,” -— it is the time for TEA Party conservatives to rebel! Vote for Newt Gingrich is all the remaining primaries, keep praying and then, take the convention by storm!

I remain praying for Divine Intervention and short of that, praying for strength and resolve that somehow, someway, TEA Party Patriots a whole lot smarter than me, will come forth with a plan to stop Romney!

God help us save our Republic.


133 posted on 04/20/2012 3:37:43 PM PDT by onyx (SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC, DONATE MONTHLY. If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: elpadre
I will enthusiastically support whomever the Republican nominee is and I pray everyone on FR will do the same.

People like you must have the political equivalent of the battered wives syndrome.

Ya keep getting lied to, raped and beat up and ya keep coming back for more.

134 posted on 04/20/2012 3:45:06 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

That’s the thing - if conservatives want the republicans to stop playing big tent, they need to take over the party. Or find a way to destroy the two party system - which would be great!


135 posted on 04/20/2012 3:45:50 PM PDT by ichabod1 (Cheney/Rumsfeld 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: hattend
I'm judging Obama's record.

Sorry, but that logic doesn't bear up to even casual scrutiny. You have got to vet the candidate you're actually placing your vote for.

Have you done that? If you have, how can you in good conscience cast that vote?

As to my vote, Newt Gingrich has that, as long as he's on the Texas ballot when we vote. If Romney clinches the nomination, I will write-in another choice, or abstain from voting for president.

I'm done giving my solemn vote to RINOs and assorted frauds. I'd rather stand and fight against a sworn enemy, than place my trust in a quisling betrayer like Romney.

136 posted on 04/20/2012 3:49:18 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: elpadre
Romney may not be all that we want but.....

Your faith in this quisling is sad and pitiable. I'd rather face up to what he is right now, than in three years time, when he's advanced Obama's agenda into rock solid permanence.

You're unlikely to fight someone posing as a team mate, but you will oppose an avowed enemy with everything you've got.

That is the simplicity of the thing.

137 posted on 04/20/2012 3:56:11 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Romney hasn’t yet successfully bought the nomination he’s insatiably lusting for, but he’s close and he’s managed to get some nationally known TEA Party elected officer holders to support him in a call for “Party unity.”

This is not the time for “Party unity,” — it is the time for TEA Party conservatives to rebel!

Amen, sister!

138 posted on 04/20/2012 3:58:46 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Well, if it’s illogical to vote against a candidate running on a 4 year old socialist record whose sole intent is to destroy the US, financially and spiritually, so be it.

Palin’s not running so my candidate is long gone. It won’t help to write her name in unless 60 million others are going to do the same thing.

It’s ABO for me.


139 posted on 04/20/2012 4:02:59 PM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

Remove Obama for fraud? We have been through impeachment before. As you know, it takes a 2/3 vote in the Senate to convict and remove from office. A nice idea, but it will never happen.

I don’t particularly like Romney, but if Obama gets elected, he will complete the destruction of this country. That may be acceptable to you, but it is not acceptable to me.


140 posted on 04/20/2012 4:07:16 PM PDT by doug from upland (Just in case, it has been reserved: www.TheBitchIsBack2012.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Turbo Pig; Windflier; All
I am not advocating Romney; I am advocating doing what is needed to ensure that obama is a one term president.

At what price? And for what reason -- because your fear of Obama has risen to a state of panic? People don't think clearly when they're panicked.

The price of Romney is too steep. The risk of losing the most conservative ground under Romney is greater than the risk of losing conservative ground under Obama -- and STOP with the Chicken Little Sky is Falling Obama is Omnipotent and We Can't Survive Him!!EEEEEEEEEE! rationale of pure panic.

I have been accused frequently by rally-round-Romney types of being driven by the petty, shallow motivations of vanity and personal dislike of Romney. It seems to me that those who blindly reel back in terror at Obama, who vow that "he can't be a two-term president! I'll vote for an orange juice can before I'll vote for him!" are equally engaging in vanity and personal dislike of Obama. It's pure emotion that shapes their strategy.

I hope a limited government conservative enters the race. Until then, voting for Romney IS AS STUPID as voting for an orange juice can. Yet I have my vote and WILL use it to FIGHT LIBERALISM with calm, reasoned strategy knowing that it's a gamble, but it's a better gamble than not voting at all or voting for Romney.

If it's R v O, I will vote third party for the express purpose of doing what I can to dilute the liberal statist victor's vote count to the smallest plurality possible, so that socialist therefore enters office as politically vulnerable and weak as possible, on record as opposed by the majority of voters.

An enemy inside the gates is a LOT more dangerous than an enemy outside the gates. Liberalism is the enemy -- not Obama, not the Democrat party, but LIBERALISM. Conservatism is our only friend in fighting liberalism. Obama is less dangerous to conservatism than Romney because Romney is an enemy inside the gates.

141 posted on 04/20/2012 4:30:25 PM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: hattend
Palin’s not running so my candidate is long gone. It won’t help to write her name in unless 60 million others are going to do the same thing.

I will write in Sarah if for nothing but to lodge my protest against what choices I'm being offered. I refuse to make a choice between two left-wing candidates.

If folks want to elect a quisling Republican traitor to the White House, they'll have to do it without my help. I'd rather face four years of civil disobedience and protest marches against an avowed enemy in the White House, than be stabbed in the back by Romney The Trojan Horse.

I'll keep my personal honor and integrity intact, thank you.

142 posted on 04/20/2012 4:30:56 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
I'll keep my personal honor and integrity intact, thank you.

By voting against Obama, my personal honor and integrity will be fine. My wife and dog will still love me.

143 posted on 04/20/2012 4:36:36 PM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Turbo Pig; All
I honestly do not know how to respond to your reply; because ..well I don't want to offend you.

I appreciate your taking into account my feelings, but please do not think I will be offended because I do not operate this way. Have at it! That's what the ideal of this country is about which so many have forgotten! Say what you mean and mean what you say, and if there is any place on this planet to do this, to offend, it's in THIS country and on this board! In fact, I would love if you tried to offend me because then we could probably get somewhere!

Now, the 4 points you make are quite honestly very weak. They have been expressed time and time again and have no legitimate consideration by conservatives who think rinos are the scourge of the earth! Here's why...

1: Yes, the damage is done. I've heard this argument EVERY election! When do you want to STOP the damage?

2: Romneycare is law in MA and it's citizens are under that PENALTY/FORCED LAW right NOW! Talk about damage being done!! Obamacare will most likely be struck down by the USSC.

3: Pure speculative B.S. A conservative can win!

4: Conservatives are winning at the local level, we have to carry that over nationally! The only way to do this is STOP voting for rinos! ABO is like a disease you LESSOR OF TWO EVILS have!

I am so sick and tired of this BS argument!! Things have changed. It's a NEW WORLD. A Different culture. A more black and white politicon. (Yes, this is a NEW WORD meaning: A politician trying to disguise who they are NOT! They try to CON you! IOW: Mitt Romney and his supporters!)

You can not win with a rino, and all rinos do is undermine the party and America. In today's political arena it's a terrible choice! Until you say enough is enough then nothing changes and we keep hearing your old, tired, worn out, ineffective 4 point arguments with NO CHANGE!

Is there more explanation you need to understand, NO MORE RINOS?

Is there more explanation you need to understand, PRINCIPLE?

144 posted on 04/20/2012 4:39:28 PM PDT by sirchtruth (Freedom is not free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts; All

“Insulting the people you are trying to convince has never been a good way to win an argument.”


That is all the Romney Superpacs, Romney supporters and Romney himself could do from the beginning of this primary campaign. Libel, slander and distort the records of every conservative who had a turn against Romney’s sleaze machine.

Every CONSERVATIVE in the race was suddenly turned into a “liberal” by the billions of dollars of Romney’s LDS bull sh*t machine.

It’s not about revenge. What these credulous dupes just don’t get is that we are in this situation NOW -BECAUSE- we have placated their traitorous lies for 24 years since Reagan left office.

Yes, we get your specious arguments. We have heard them enough. We will NOT vote for Romney nor will we vote for Obama. We will vote for a conservative so the lost GOP votes can me specifically QUANTIFIED. Henceforth there will be no question as to the consequences of Fox News and the establishment’s chicanery in this race and what it has begotten.

If only people like this dupe who just insulted you with the insipid comment you just addressed - if only they had the perspicacity and the backbone to take a stand against it once and for all, we wouldn’t have to be in this situation.

It’s not as though we do not have decades of precedent of what happens when we give in to these underhanded sobs and “plug our noses”. If we had not done so for the past two decades, we would NOT be in this situation.

There’s still time people. Newt can’t win enough delegates to win the nomination - but he sure as hell can win enough to deprive this ignoble shape-shifter from being the GOP nominee.

These people continue to circumvent the issue which is that the GOP HAS A CHOICE. These Romulans are the epitome of the old-school HIJACKING TERRORISTS in the sense that the traditional hijacker would take the person hostage and make demands that come with the stipulation that if they are not placated, their hostage dies.

That is what Mitt and his cell have been doing from day one as they systematically employed their terror tactics from state to state, primary to primary. Romney and his cell have systematically assaulted each and every conservative from Newt to Perry to Bachman to Cain to Santorum and back to Newt.

We started out with the promise of 999 and unless these people wake up, we will end with 666.

Under no circumstance will I betray my faith and my principles by voting for this lying, slandering, underhanded scoundrel.


145 posted on 04/20/2012 4:41:20 PM PDT by publius321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mo
The Conservative Cause is clearly served by an Obama re-election rather than a Romney win. A Right leaning/Conservative Congress can easily remain united behind an Obama re-election....whereas the same Congress will be sliced and diced by the RINOS if Romney is in the White House.

THANK YOU. But ... but ... but ... it must be your hatred of Romney, your personal dislike of him, your need to throw a temper tantrum, your vanity ... talking in that post!

*ducking*
Just kidding! I agree with you 100%.

FRiend, pray that conservatives get over their panic and wake up to your SAGE WARNING in time enough to reject Romney at every turn.

My preference: I'd rather Newt Gingrich got the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination, with Palin as a running mate. Or vice versa.

GODSPEED NEWT GINGRICH.

146 posted on 04/20/2012 4:44:10 PM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FReepers; All
Click!

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_090711/content/01125111.guest.html
With Freedom Under Assault, We're Told We Must Moderate?
Moderation is not a substantive belief. This is my problem with moderates. There isn't a core there! Moderation is a tactic. It's not a set of principles. It is a tactic that says, "Regardless of the situation, regardless of events, my first impulse is to find a different way around." I know moderation, per se, is illogical because there are clearly times when it is self-destructive or counterproductive. For instance, moderation after we were attacked at Pearl Harbor would have been irrational. Moderation against slavery would have been immoral. How do you debate the issue of moderation if it has no core? You wind up debating tactics, but tactics without principle are pointless -- and this has always been my problem with moderates. ...

Particularly in the face of the most radical and destructive administration in modern American history, where the president has said he wants to fundamentally transform the nation, what does moderation look like? Where am I supposed to moderate? What am I supposed to moderate? Are all these Republican candidates tonight at the debate be asking themselves, "Who's willing to go further in compromising with the Democrats?" To show what? To accomplish what? Isn't the purpose of this debate tonight for one of these people to stand head and shoulders above everybody else in demonstrating he or she is the one who can beat Obama?
Republican moderates are guaranteed losers in eight out of ten elections you're gonna have. Now, I think that people who write pieces about "moderation" need to do a little bit more than just sit back and be critical. We need to know what it is these moderates think is worth fighting for. Is it just winning elections with whoever can win so that the result may not even be productive? These moderates need to tell us what are the principles that they believe that an individual or a nation should stand firm on, because, so far, moderates don't do that. That's why they are moderates! They don't want to be tied down. They want to be able to preach moderation because it gets them praise.

147 posted on 04/20/2012 4:46:46 PM PDT by RedMDer (https://support.woundedwarriorproject.org/default.aspx?tsid=93)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway
Like a laser...this must be the focus for now. The dangerous boy socialist must go!

Like a laser, your one-track-focused take blinds you completely to the bigger picture. Imagine the Democrat president to follow Romney. American children today would pay a heavy price for such thinking as yours' cowardice and lack of faith in RIGHT.

You want to strike a deal with the devil that is Romney in order to avoid Obama. I got news for you, FRiend. A deal with the devil is ALWAYS a losing proposition.

148 posted on 04/20/2012 4:51:07 PM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin; mo
Then since your goal is to advance the conservative cause, you must be intending to vote for Obama yourself.

Chin, there are other ways of rejecting Romney to advance the conservative cause. Try giving it a modicum of thought.

149 posted on 04/20/2012 4:53:52 PM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RedMDer

Rush Limbaugh could have cut the head off the snake and destroyed the Romney candidacy at any point in this race.

Unfortunately, he gave both sides just enough from day to day to feel like Rush was “on their side”. He played both sides for ratings.

Mark Levin and Mike Reagan were among the very few who had the balls and integrity to make a clear stand against Romney.

Despite saying that ‘if Romney were to get the nomination he would then support” the sleaze - at least Levin had the integrity to tear the imposter apart on his show for the past several months.

I like Rush; however, he passed up an important opportunity at our expense at this historical moment detrimental to our survival.


150 posted on 04/20/2012 5:03:56 PM PDT by publius321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-227 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