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

Skip to comments.

Frank discussion re our loss to Obama/Romney and the future direction of FR and tea party movement
Click here to pledge your support! ^ | May 4, 2012 | Jim Robinson

Posted on 05/04/2012 6:31:27 AM PDT by Jim Robinson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 1,351-1,4001,401-1,4501,451-1,5001,501-1,525 last
To: Jim Robinson

My pleasure Jim.

And thank YOU for giving Conservative Americans the BEST forum for traditional American thinking and values and the opportunity to express what so many other media and discussion forums refuse to provide.

God bless you.


1,501 posted on 05/09/2012 7:20:36 AM PDT by ZULU (Non Nobis Domine Non Nobis Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 876 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

Thank you for the ping.


1,502 posted on 05/09/2012 8:45:37 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 1417 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
except for Tim Pawlenty, too much of a wienie for me...

That's why I put him in for Sec'y of Transportation -- a position that most Administrations give to a member of the other party just to show they are able to reach across the aisle!

FReegards!


1,503 posted on 05/09/2012 9:48:46 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1499 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Thanks,Jim...well-said. I’m looking at my vote for Romney as a vote against four more years of 0bama-something that this country cannot sustain.We are on the brink,and it’s time to just sigh deeply,hold our collective noses and pull that lever.He’s only one man,and, by voting conservative down the line for congressional candidates,we can help keep Romney in check for the duration,then Sarah can step up in 2016 and finish the repair job that we so desperately need.


1,504 posted on 05/09/2012 10:11:31 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee (If you want to kick a tiger in the ass, you better have a plan for dealing with his teeth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Finny
Interesting account about the Japanese farms. The fact has always been overlooked that Adam Smith was a moral philosopher who asserted that capitalism cannot survive without a moral base. John Adams said the same thing about our Constitution.

People who fail to understand that predatory practices are bad for capitalism, and for a free society, are the socialist's best friend. They make all the snarky political cartoons come true.

If Romney's business practices were as predatory as advertised, Gingrich was right, Rush and all the rest were wrong.

1,505 posted on 05/09/2012 2:34:52 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1464 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast
Whether or not Romney be the candidate is beside the point. It makes no difference who the Republican candidate is, the dark scenario you describe still holds.

Agreed.

But it would make a difference should the Republican candidate win.

1,506 posted on 05/09/2012 10:04:38 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1396 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

Noumenon. Coooool name.

I Guess you know this, but Kant says we can’t know anything about you.

Nietzsche doesn’t even think you exist.

Just had to point that out.


1,507 posted on 05/10/2012 2:23:28 PM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

"Y'know Nietzsche said that 'out of chaos comes order'."

1,508 posted on 05/10/2012 2:24:51 PM PDT by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1507 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

And for good measure, see what Ambrose Bierce has to say. Works on a number of levels, doesn’t it? I like it when someone figures it out...


1,509 posted on 05/10/2012 2:49:20 PM PDT by Noumenon (If people saw socialists for what they truly are, slaughter would ensue - in self-defense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1507 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Never mind that sh1t now - here comes Mongo!


1,510 posted on 05/10/2012 2:50:22 PM PDT by Noumenon (If people saw socialists for what they truly are, slaughter would ensue - in self-defense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1508 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

On Ambrose Bierce...I had to look it up, I confess...but BRILLIANT!


1,511 posted on 05/10/2012 3:12:34 PM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1509 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Many Freepers will vote for Romney, as I will. We need Obama out and that is all that remains between a semblance of our once Great Nation and total Socialism.

Many of my friends here have already quit coming in and have joined other forums.

I have stayed to do my best to defeat Obama for a second term
of theft and socialism.

We can all agree to disagree, on Romney but getting the Vote out to defeat Obama and his Czars, MSM, and Communist friends is the first order of work we need to undertake.

God Bless You All!


1,512 posted on 05/11/2012 2:23:06 PM PDT by OPS4 (Ops4 God Bless America!Jesus is Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

Well said!


1,513 posted on 05/12/2012 4:20:12 AM PDT by CanuckYank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1417 | View Replies]

To: Finny

The Death of Common Sense obituary along with the majority ignoring a few simple tools like Occum’s Razor (the simplest explanation is usually the correct one) and Show Me the Money (ie follow the money trial to uncover the reasons) are at the heart of most of our problems.

Like you, I hope fervently that at least Common Sense experiences a resurrection between now and Election Day.


1,514 posted on 05/12/2012 4:25:55 AM PDT by CanuckYank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1451 | View Replies]

To: CanuckYank
Yes, but (unless I have misinterpreted a quick scan of your recent in-forum posts) unlike me, you think common sense means for about 60 percent of Republicans to ignore their better judgment and vote for Romney SOLELY because they -- like you -- are paralyzed with the fear that Obama's delusions of grandeur and power aren't delusions.

You are absolutely CERTAIN that Obama could do all kinds of horrible things. I got news for you. Four years ago, a lot of folks like you were AS CERTAIN that we'd not have 2010 midterms, and AS CERTAIN that if Clinton won a second term it would be the end of America.

I know people are rationlizing their vote for bad, disgusting Romney as their "only choice" and that it is the only way they can vote "against" Obama. Both rationales are wholly false, and furthermore, those rationalizing their reluctant vote for Romney are entirely ignoring 50 percent of the equation of voting to show their support for installing a full-blown big nanny government statist to assume the most powerful position in the Republican party. FRiend, that is PLUMB NUTS, zero "common sense" is involved.

The death of common sense is actually signified by the fact that such folks are ONLY seeing the half signifying what they're voting against, and ignoring the other half, which is that as much as their vote is against Obama, it is FOR Romney, who has a demonstrated, documented RECORD of being an agent of advancing ALL of the big government statist immoral issues I and many of us have been voting Republican all these years to OPPOSE.

Talk about the death of common sense!

1,515 posted on 05/12/2012 9:58:16 AM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1514 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
(Ron Paul)...Yes, he’s said some things about foreign policy that raise many Republicans’ hackles, but does that trump all his other conservative bonafides?

Yes.
That and the fact that he is a conservative's crazy uncle and would never be able to pass those admittedly desired ends corresponding to "conservative bonafides".

Plus the fact that he isn't a conservative, he's a libertarian (as well as your crazy uncle).

1,516 posted on 05/12/2012 5:05:30 PM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1469 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; donmeaker
Please don't hammer me for this:
But it is entirely possible to be pro-life and conservative without also being hard shell evangelical and refusing to recognize confluence of interests in favor of the "my way or the highway" attitude that permeates much of FR's debate.
1,517 posted on 05/12/2012 5:17:35 PM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1478 | View Replies]

To: norton

I am glad that what you say is true. I am familiar with the ‘hard shell’ types, having attended Evangel College in 1975 and 1976, but am not one.

There used to be such a thing as Christian Liberalism, in contrast to the monarchists and socialists who ever sought to increase state power. Christian Liberals pointed out the inefficiency and corruption of government programs, and as a counter, developed and provided private charity.

Christian liberals began the abolition movement, and saw it to fruition. Beecher was a famous abolitionist preacher, and his daughter, Harriet Ward Beecher Stowe wrote “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” which laid out the essential honesty of “Uncle Tom” and personified the evil of the slave power in Simon Legree.

The modern conservative movement is based on what is sometimes called classical liberalism, a counter to the progressive movement. As the Progressives once again pushed greater government power, and the paternal care of the ignorant slaves (this time not just blacks) the classical liberals continued to provide private hospitals, private dormitories for the indigent, and offered paths to prosperity through private colleges. State colleges and teacher training schools (normal schools) were developed, funded by federal land grants. Homestead acts provided opportunity for millions.

As reward for these many successful programs to help the helpless, the progressives called them ‘Social Darwinists’ to provide a strawman contrast to the Progressive Eugenics movement. The progressive Margaret Sanger sought to put her Eugenic Principle into practice by aborting as many children children of ‘inferior types’ as possible.

We still see the progressive movement today, as they sell poison and call it food, sell murder and call it health care, sell taxes, and call it a pension, sell government power and call it a benefit to the people, sell slavery and call it freedom.

Lies are what they do, until they can steal. They steal until they can enslave. Then they enslave and bring along its necessary servants, torture and kidnapping. If one resists their torture and kidnapping, they they are pleased to resort to murder.

You don’t have to be a Christian to be opposed to lies, theft, slavery, torture, kidnapping and murder. Many Jews are also, and take seriously the Talmudic direction to look at slavery as if bound with the slave. Many atheists see that theft and slavery lead to a society worse in all respects than a society of free people, and thus need no religious sanction to oppose the progressives. Pagans, a smaller minority even than atheists, thrive on freedom, and would lose religious liberty under the mandatory atheism of the progressive movement.


1,518 posted on 05/13/2012 10:51:07 AM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1517 | View Replies]

To: In Maryland

I would appoint Eugene Volokh. The courts need the technical expertise that he, or someone like him would provide. If not him, I would chat quietly with him to see who he thought could be a candidate.


1,519 posted on 05/13/2012 10:59:54 AM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1453 | View Replies]

To: Finny

MMMMMMM, let’s see if I can clarify my personal position a bit:

(1) FACT: OB has single handedly trashed much of the Constitutional protections spelled out for us by the FFs (EOs up the wazoo, appointment of unvetted Czars, filing suits against states, ratcheting up racical tensions, funneling money to cronies through bogus “green projects”, expansion of HSD/TSA/DOJ/ATF atrocities etc, appointment of Supreme Court Justice with OBVIOUS conflicts of interest, etc, etc)

HE NEEDS TO BE GONE, PERIOD. While the next guy (ABSOLUTELY MUST BE NON-Democrat) may not be our dream leader, we HAVE TO assume he will not be as bad or worse than OB - if we can’t assume that, then we are indeed doomed, because this nation CANNOT survive more of OBs Presidential Management Style/Behavior.

(2) FACT: Essentially ALL of the current members of the DC Power Wielding Elites also need to be GONE, because they ALL, like a spouse in a poisoned marriage who forgives and ignores the abuses perpetrated against them, have acted as ENABLERS of OB in committing his unspeakable crimes against the citizens of this nation. (Recent polls indicate that a substantial percentage of the US Voters agree with me and would like to replace the ENTIRE CONGRESS!)

Without BOTH of these events taking place, the cancer that has permeated DC to its core will continue to rot and pervert most if not all newcomers to the cesspool.

Perhaps you don’t agree with me as to the dangerous state of decay that has slowly developed in DC and eaten away the morals and ethics that are ESSENTIAL to any sort of “... by, of and for the people ...” governing as envisioned by the FFs, and that is your right obviously. However, you mischaracterize my positions when you state that I am “... paralyzed with the fear that Obama’s delusions of grandeur and power aren’t delusions.”

I submit to you that there is AMPLE evidence to the contrary, and that OB has been VERY successful in his plans.
(1) He told us what he was going to do (”...join me as we FUNDAMENTALLY change America ...”)
(2) He has done much of that (OBcare, Bailouts and the other points listed above)
(3) He is now telling us what he did (re-election campaign bragging)

Ips facto (I think), his delusions are not delusions, they are plans and successes, IMHO, based on the obvious evidence.

And, while I too have many reservations about Romney, WHERE do you come up with that figure of 60% of Pubbies disapprove/won’t vote for him???? Please provide a link, I’d love to review that poll.

I fear that your view of reality is in very soft focus if you truly believe your statement about “delusions”, and I don’t think that sort of view of OBs record shows any common sense at all.


1,520 posted on 05/14/2012 10:04:20 AM PDT by CanuckYank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1515 | View Replies]

To: CanuckYank
No poll, just look at the primaries. He only wins by splitting the other two.

And once again, your ENTIRE POST was all about what Obama might do, and why you think he could do it. NOT ONE BIT was about Romney and the consequences of his getting in office.

Most important of all is LIFE'S LESSON which is this: throughout life, in any circumstance, when you make a choice against your better judgment but do it anyway out of pure dread, fear, and panic, it almost always ends up being a mistake.

I'm scared plenty of Obama, believe me. I also KNOW DARNED WELL that Romney is as inclined toward liberal activist judges as Obama. I know the SJC is about the biggest boogie-man card being used to browbeat, bully, and scare people into voting for a FULL BLOWN BIG GOVERNMENT STATIST tyrant Romney for Fear of Omnipotent Obama.

It's a risk either way. Obama is plenty scary -- but in case you haven't looked -- and apparently a lot of people haven't -- Romney is JUST AS SCARY but what makes him more dangerous in the long run is that Romney is a Republican, and if he wins, he would certainly make liberalism more powerful in BOTH parties. If Obama won, especially if he won by such a plurality in the 34-40 percent range, that 60 to 66 percent of the total vote was against him, it would guaranteed make liberalism WEAKER in both parties and would make STRONGER any and all opposition to Obama's attempts to make himself Ruler. THINK IT THROUGH and please ask yourself if your fear of Obama hasn't reached a point of hysteria.

1,521 posted on 05/14/2012 4:10:01 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 1520 | View Replies]

To: Finny
Please pay attention to what is already our reality:

"Obama won, especially if he won by such a plurality in the 34-40 percent range, that 60 to 66 percent of the total vote was against him, it would guaranteed make liberalism WEAKER in both parties"

He's already ruling by fiat despite his presumed support from RINOs and congressional dems.
He continues to appoint minions to critical, unfettered, positions from which they rule by "procedures", "priorities", and personal opinions that often directly oppose both law and the constitution.
He has the full support of the media and a pot load of special interests, including "labor" unions going out in force (and paid for it) to intimidate any opposition.
...It's a long list.

But you think that he'd stop all that if elected by a slim margin because you convinced enough people to throw a protest vote to Ron Paul or some other "pure" candidate??

1,522 posted on 05/15/2012 8:21:51 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1521 | View Replies]

To: norton
First of all, "some other 'pure' candidate" my ass -- Romney is "impure" on THE FIVE MAJOR ISSUES LIBERALS HAVE BEEN PUSHING FOR DECADES.

"Purity" -- you are already so far behind out of the starting gate that it's pathetic if you even think my problem with Romney is because I'm being a "purist." YOU would vote for Hillary Clinton if she switched to Republican and call me a "purist" for refusing to join you. THINK, for heaven's sake!!!

If Obama is able to "rule by fiat" to the degree you believe, then why are we even having the 2012 elections? Why doesn't he just wave his magic fiat wand and take care of it now? What is stopping him? And why did we have the 2010 mid-terms -- plenty here were saying we wouldn't have them, just as a whole lotta people thought that if Clinton got a second term, it would be the end of America.

That's not to say that Obama isn't damned dangerous, very scary, and out to kill America. HE IS. But when elected politicians fear for their skins in terms of being re-elected -- and they WOULD if they saw the majority of American voters reject liberalsm in both Democrats AND Republicans -- then they fight instead of roll over, the way you're rolling over in pure, pissing-down-the-leg fear.

And your "cure" is as bad as the ailment. Voting for Romney is as stupid as voting for Obama. The ONLY reason you're willing to vote for him is because you're scared and panicked. That is a VERY STUPID REASON to vote for an authoritarian Republican statist you'd never vote for in a million years otherwise.

1,523 posted on 05/15/2012 8:38:26 AM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1522 | View Replies]

To: Finny

It seems like what we have here is not just the “ can’t see the forest for the trees” but in fact “the trees for the bark” (aka “barking”). You appear to have your nose so close to the bark of one specific tree, (ie Romney is a less than ideal pubbie candidate), that you can’t even see all of the tree your nose is up against, let alone the entire forest.

I’ve had the pleasure of having lived in a “utopian” society created by commie/socialist idiots/tyrants, have you?

It is NOT hysteria which causes me to so thoroughly fear the results of another four years of the OB team - it is experience based factual knowledge of why EVERY SINGLE such attempt at providing “utopia” to the masses has failed and will ALWAYS, in the end fail.

Try standing in line for four or five hours for a single bucket of coal to heat an entire apartment with for a week or more, then tell me again that I shouldn’t be worried about the OB plan for America’s utopian future.

Your admission that the 60% is bogus relative to what will ACTUALLY happen in November says a lot about your seemingly well thought out statements that are little more than a thinly veiled attack on Romney. You have a right to dislike him, but why fog your positions with such Democratic Machine/Lamestream Press drivel?

I’m more concerned about some basic issues with Romney, relative to November, that don’t necessarily bother me, personally. Will enough voters be able to look past the Mormon issue to defeat OB? Can the same be said about his image as a corporate raider, viewed as a guy who went around busting up companies and sacrificing the American Worker while doing so? Will he be viewed by too many as a “spoiled rich kid”, grown up to be a “selfish capitalistic blood sucker”?

Can you provide us with ONE single quote from Romney about “... fundamentally changing America ...”? All I’ve heard is a desire to bring back the historical set of attitudes and beliefs that made this country the number one destination in the world for oppressed, but ambitious people. I haven’t heard him propose changes to make it easier for the lazy, shiftless, entitled takers to prosper here, have you?

It’s your choice to equate these two candidates, but in my common sense view, their is NO COMPARISON WHATSOEVER.

One is an complete unknown of suspicious origins and accomplishments, splashed on the scene by a well oiled organized group bent on the destruction of this country. He is a self proclaimed socialist if not commie or closet muzzie who has NEVER held a REAL job in his entire adult life, and who has DEMONSTRABLY done more damage to this nation, (and by extension the ENTIRE world) than ALL the elected officials that preceded him.

The other candidate is a well known, well established family man who espouses the mainstream characteristics of this country and has been an active businessman for decades.

A “protest vote” is is a fine and noble thing, in moderate circumstances. BUT, when the future of life as we have known it is in the balance, (all studies show we are nearing the tipping point for there being more taking voters than producing voters), we CANNOT afford “protest” votes from producers.

Each and EVERY vote is critical - remember how few votes were at stake in the Gore/Bush election. (I won’t even address the voter fraud issue and which group, takers or producers have the most bogus voters in their camp.)

Using common sense, it’s a slam dunk decision, at least for me.


1,524 posted on 05/15/2012 10:35:34 AM PDT by CanuckYank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1521 | View Replies]

To: CanuckYank

Nice observations. I too am voting for the candidate who was endorsed by Judge Bork.


1,525 posted on 05/15/2012 8:13:24 PM PDT by H.Akston (Sandra Fluke is more like a looter than a slut. At least a slut gives something for what she takes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1524 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 1,351-1,4001,401-1,4501,451-1,5001,501-1,525 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