Posted on 07/17/2012 3:30:32 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
If conservatives formed there own third party, which only supported Republicans with proven track records, members of Congress would have no alternative but to take the conservative position into account before supporting liberal legislation. The President would find his situation similar.
Consider the current election, if conservatives had hung together in declining to support Romney, he would b e making very overt guarantees to conservatives to get our vote. However, when so many automatically support him, no matter how dissatisfied they are, he knows he doesn't have to do anything - so don't expect anything.
Well, he definitely does not believe in the same God and Holy Bible that I do or he would never have been an abortionist, homosexualist statist!! To me he’s just your run of the mill godless liberal progressive. No difference between him and the godless liberal progressives Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Joe Lieberman, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, et al!! And, yes, these godless abortionist/homosexualist statists all claim to be devout Christians, Jews or Mormons, too.
For me I wish Cheney would just get up there and take the place over. Got a new heart, same spirit, let’s get the Kenyan commie bastard out of the white house!
I’d really love that to happen. Not holding my breath.
Yes. That’s a zoticide. Poor little fella had nothing to FReep for anymore.
At least your not folding up into a fetal ball and hoping for the best!
I can buy in to your idea or hope because at least it is something to work towards.
Having said that I’m totally onboard! I will use your description as a guide line, and pray that we destroy the dems and GOPe on election day!
Please accept my apologies for being testy lately, it’s because I’m very concerned for my country and my grand children’s future.
I don’t know who to fight but fighting is all I know how to do.
Randy
Contribution to follow.
Or if (not as planned or carried out by any human of course) Barack and Joe were to find themselves visiting the pearly gates on the same day. OK, that would mean President Boehner, but America would be spared a furious lame duck bent on vengeance.
I agree, I can respect a fighting spirit, even if in error, far more than a coward. Mitt has shown a troubling mix of cowardly fratricidal back stabbing and feisty Obama bashing. Obama? He’s 99 44/100% coward.
"There's nothing new under the sun." The Liberal sycophants in our MSM-driven culture have been around a hell of a lot longer than Obama -- they were around when Clinton "won" with a "popular mandate" of 43%, and in fact they were MORE powerful then for the lack of more open and alternative media we have now. And Clinton was MORE POPULAR then than Obama is now.
Just the same, because enough people (I was NOT one of them) had the courage to reject liberal Republican HW, hold fast to their convictions, and take a chance on Perot in a year when the Democrat candidate was weak and unknown, Clinton's lack of mandate resulted in the Republican Revolution two years later. I'm sure you would have though any hope of such as "silly" then as you do now.
Human nature is human nature. KCon, FEAR and faint-heartedness are the only things that validate Obama's ability to play Dictator. It's as old as the mountains.
If Obama was as all-powerful as you say, why are we even having elections in 2012? How is it we are here on FR debating?
Could it be because your fear is exaggerated?
Most states (including mine) wouldn't stand for that kind of nonsense, and in fact I own several weapons that are still absolutely forbidden in Massachusetts. I agree with you here: Romney's 2nd Amendment record is far from exemplary. I don't even think he rates a "C" grade. But Obama gets an "F" across the board because he'd ban them all, given a chance.
If they tell ya you're no longer free and order you to board the boxcar and report to some government camp, are you going to follow orders and comply?
You going to roll over and die at that point?
The knock-on effect of refusing Mitt a vote certainly can be debated about. Strategic withdrawals can very well result in better wins in the future.
What’s surprising to me, politically speaking, is that there is NOT a Perot figure looming on the horizon to deal the worst candidate a sub mandate win (not that Obama would care, but still). Goode is maybe the closest to a national figure — and he’d formerly been not GOP but Democrat. It seems a bit odd that he has ended up where he is now. Anyhow, he hasn’t anywhere close to a Perotish public stature.
The way the system is set up I'm afraid conservatives from the beginning were doomed to fight a delaying action against the inexorable growth of the State - it doesn't matter who we elect, all victories are temporary as everyone & everything is co-opted eventually.
How many times have we invested ourselves in a battle only to find the GOP had left us on the field.
Even so, I'm still inclined to focus the threat before me, and that is Obama, and hope for a little more time.
Honestly, the only other options are to revolt (and I mean really) or quit the whole thing and hope to escape the tender mercies of the State, in the form of death panels or whatever, for a few more decades until I go to my reward. I need a drink.
*ducking*
I hate Romney as much as Obama but I need a plan. Good, bad, doesn’t matter.
At least now I can fight for something.
Your. Lips. To. God’s. Ears.
Nature has a way with vacuums. Including, we can hope, Human Nature.
Obama sure seems to like to think big picture about gun banning, hence F&F. So far, his Ratly Senate hasn’t dared bring forth anything of that nature to be run around the political football field — has it?
Now, now Finny! I would never shoot at you! No need to duck. But you better run. ;-P
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.