That is why post 64 below, we don’t want to have to speak openly and therefore negatively about Nancy Reagan, but when forced to by a hard nosed poster using the Reagan name in the corrupt service of the Reagan hating Mitt Romney, then we have to speak the truth about her.
“To: Innovative
You are on a site with knowledgeable conservatives.
While it is polite to recognize that of course Nancy Reagan endorsed the Republican nominee (did you think she was going third party?) we conservatives know that she is no Ronald Reagan, and never was.
Nancy Reagan was never a Conservative, so show a little grace and don’t put her in front of freerepublic and pretend she is a conservative icon when it comes to endorsements, and force people who know better to respond at a level that a routine, perfunctory endorsement does not call for.
You show your own ignorance, inexperience, and rudeness by using Nancy Reagan like that. ansel12”
Interesting how the opinion of Nancy Reagan has evolved over this thread. First, she was being “used” by Romney’s people, and clearly wrong about her husbands opinion. Then she was senile, and finally was never a conservative and one step away from Gloria Steinem.
Isn’t it possible, just possible, that Mrs. Reagan is facing the same choice that many conservatives are, that one of the two nominiees WILL be the president next year, and while Romney certainly leaves a lot to be desired, is a better option than Obama? And being such, she is choosing to highlight Romney’s positives?
Is it not further possible that she, his wife of 50 years, would have known what her husband would have done?
I just dont understand the mentality that says that anyone who wont scream FUMR at the top of their lungs at all times MUST be a RINO, or Senile, or a Phoney, or manipulated. Men of good will can disagree, including conservatives.