Romney to NAACP: Obama made it worse for you 'in almost every way'

The Hill ^

[lag along]

There are Americans who are pro-business, pro-free enterprise, pro secure borders who can support measures that promote American exceptionalism without regard to color, accents, religious background, tribal ancestry (whether gaul, hun, bantu, asiatic, etc who will vote to give Romney a chance to live up to his word. He has made a case for being pro-business and against racial division.
I still do not trust him on immigration, government control, and know nothing of his foreign policy.

He grew up in wealth, made more money, dodged the draft, enacted gay marriage into law, has not really come down on the secure borders, failed to support openly Arizona and Alabama.
Compare resumes with obama - neither is Christian; obama is a communist, race-baiting ne'er do well who has accomplished nothing. Romney is a capitalist who does not mind government loans, guarantees, etc to bail out or start businesses.
Choices - choices?

[1010RD]

The case for Romney is clear - Obama's 2nd Term. It would look just like his first term only with the safeties off. We're in total agreement at the first paragraph. I doubt you'd find a FReeper who had Romney as their top 3 picks during the Primary.

I still do not trust him on immigration, government control, and know nothing of his foreign policy.

I suspect that he's no worse than the last four Republican Presidents on the issue of immigration. It will be states leading the way by passing English only laws for governmental bodies, eliminating welfare and education benefits for illegal immigrants, etc. At the federal level there's a consensus for status quo, plus many immigrants have left for economically growing Mexico. Now is an ideal time for states to make changes to their welfare policies.

On government control I trust few politicians. On SCOTUS I trust only Thomas and we need four more just like him to be certain, five if you suspect he's moving on in less than 20 years. You and I could agree instantly on eliminating both DOEs and remanding that money back to the respective states. I don't see Congress or Romney leading the charge to eliminate any departments, but I'm happy to be wrong on that count.

I pray his foreign policy isn't a redux of Obama's. Hilary's ploy to play giant and "reset" our role with the world was pure theater. Nobody respects Obama and hence America. Hilary's a clown and having her out, along with her boss will only be an improvement.

He grew up in wealth, made more money, - irrelevant to me.

dodged the draft - relevant, but it isn't clear to me that this is what happened.

enacted gay marriage into law - this disturbs me a lot, along with his support of homosexual adoption

has not really come down on the secure borders, failed to support openly Arizona and Alabama - True.

Compare resumes with obama - neither is Christian Romney is a Christian. Obama states that he is, but he attended Rev. Wright's bigoted, crazy Black Liberation Theology church for nearly a quarter century with his daughters and wife. Plus, Obama doesn't act like a Christian,etc.

obama is a communist, race-baiting ne'er do well who has accomplished nothing.

- Agreed.

Romney is a capitalist who does not mind government loans, guarantees, etc to bail out or start businesses. - I don't know about this, but government loan guarantees, etc. exist and you'd be a fool not to use them. I use every opportunity government provides to insure my business succeeds. To do otherwise is stupid. Yet, here I am on FR fighting to get them eliminated. So it isn't clear to me that this is a negative. Actually, it isn't a negative at all.

Choices - choices? - This makes little sense. The choice isn't a hairsbreadth between them, but a Grand Canyon. Romney's the nominee and is an improvement over Obama if he simply gets the economy on track. Let our conservatives in Congress lead the way on everything else.

[lag along]

Goldwater to Palen (and the cranky guy)

once more unto the breach = Romney it is.

[atc23]

. . . "When you’re speaking to a bunch of race mongers

That's your premise? I don't believe Romney should have gone there in the first place. Somebody needs to stop giving "race mongers" a forum to get booed from. Mittens isn't going to get any votes from these people anyway.

At some point, someone needs to rise above the race hate.

[1010RD]

There are many opinions on this visit. I believe it was great to go into the lion’s den. They have a known agenda. It isn’t neutral and they cannot use race when the President is black. Furthermore, cities, where the vast majority of blacks live are run by Democrats and many of those are black as well.

Romney is running a winning strategy in this regard. See here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2905486/posts?page=2#2

[lag along]

I do not recall ever using the word race monger. Nor did I suggest that Romney should not have gone. I thought his presentation was reasonable. And, the applause he received was deserved.