For the Robama peeps, don't bother trying to argue with the facts posted above.. you're not worth wasting anyone's time with if you ignore facts.
Posted on 05/16/2012 2:51:31 PM PDT by xzins
Yes, there is lots of information. None of it reassures me that the man has any core beliefs. I can’t imagine Romney being able formulate a concise but substantive statement regarding his philosophy of government. I’m sure Bachman, Paul, Gingrich and Cain could do that easily.
I did. It blew.
I’m at the “I personally don’t care who wins the election”. Although Romney will win. My efforts lie with getting a senate and congress elected that will give fits to whoever becomes president.
And your 'truth' is Virgil Goode?! Virgil Goode, no offense to the man, is the definition of a lost cause. Damn. Even Michael Moore approves of that message.
No. It’s not blew; it’s read.
It’s read meat for conservatives who realize the GOP can’t be changed.
With the exception of Reagan, in my lifetime I’ve watched:
nixon: wage and price controls
ford: liberal rockefeller repub
Reagan: True Conservative
GHW Bush: liberal rockefeller repub
Dole: niceguy rockefeller repub
GW Bush: blue-blood credentials from a rockefeller dad
McCain: war pow rockefeller repub
Romney: blue-blood credentials, himself a social corporatist 3rd wayer. Not a conservative bone in his body.
Goode is a conservative.
Can you solemnly affirm that Romney is a solid conservative?
H*ll no. Wouldn't ever even try.
Can you solemnly affirm that Goode will send the Kenyan packing in November?
I loathe the GOP establishment, have no use for Romney, but piece is poorly written.
Some RomneyBots want some proof their darlin’ boy would actually say something so Barry...."
Yep...it was a FR article. The actual wording, I see, was, "if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship". Dear Jesus, save us and come soon.....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2882371/posts
The author focuses solely on policy, legislation, and money. There is so much more to consider.
- The author forgets the damage a President Obama can do to the Supreme Court if he hs the opportunity to nominate more justices.
- He forgets the damage Obama can do to relationships with our allies by leaving them to twist in the wind.
- He forgets the damage Obama can do by emboldening our enemies who DO NOT fear him and will not restrain themselves.
- He forgets the destruction that Obama and his Executive agencies can do to our constitutional rights.
Our individual freedoms probably will not survive another four years of Obama.
Of course not. Our purpose is building a conservative party, a new home for conservatives.
The GOP is not a home for conservatives. It will not change. It’s very rules make change impossible.
Romney is not a conservative. He will govern just as he did in Massachusetts: big government, liberal judges appointments, romneycare, abortion, gay adoption, gay boy scout leaders, etc.
I do know we’ll be one step closer to a viable conservative party if you join with us.
Ping thread
Just don’t vote for Romney (D-Mass.), the hood ornament of the Republican spending machine. You will regret it.
However, Romney is not a conservative....now matter how much the GOP-"no choicers" like to wish (pray/hope/deceive selves into believing/etc.) Just thought you'd like to see what the entire section says.
The section, by the way, is obvious sarcasm & hyperbole, one of those conventions in writing that sometimes happen in pieces such as this.
One problem with the argument. You I believe are supporting Virgil Goode.
Virgil Goode was a republican for almost a decade. And he didn’t leave out of a principled stand against the party, he “left” because he lost an election, and didn’t think he could win another election. In fact, he filed paperwork to run as a republican again, but then dropped out of the 2010 race.
It is only in 2012, when he again had no chance to win a republican nomination, that Virgil decided to move on.
Virgil is a party-hopper. When it was advantageoous, he was a solid democrat, supporting the Equal Rights Amendment. In practice, he was a horrible democrat, being much more conservative than the typical democrat, so other than voting the party line on leadership, committees, and such, he didn’t really belong in the democrat party.
He then did the “independent” thing. After that looked like a loser for him, he jumped again to the republican party, where he spoke of loyalty to the organization, and fit right in.
When that wasn’t working for him he jumped ship again, and now he’s, what, the constitution party candidate? No doubt after he loses this year, he’ll find some other party to join.
The point isn’t that Virgil is fickle. It’s that he was part of the “corrupt”, “bankrupt” GOP that this author denounces, and Virgil never indicated a problem with that GOP until he failed to beat a democrat for election, and then knew he couldn’t get a primary nomination again.
So, we are supposed to think the GOP is a bankrupt organization pushing failure on us, but vote for a guy who pledged his fealty to that very GOP, and in fact served during the very time we say they lost their way and started spending us into oblivion, simply because he lost an election and had to change flags to get a new ride?
Good post (#174). It boggles my mind that ALL conservatives wouldn’t vote for ANYBODY to replace this commie bastid we now have in the WH.
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.