Is Mitt Becoming More Conservative?

...Protecting the middle class might be the theme of Obama's campaign ads, but the defining movement of this campaign came when Obama belittled the efforts of Main Street America when he stated that "you didn't build that." Those sneering words about smart, hardworking people revealed the ugly side of Obama's redistributionalist ideology. As in 2008, most of the media accept all the carefully scripted images of Obama as Gospel truth while they busy themselves trying to either hide or spin away all those extemporaneous words and deeds that display Obama's true beliefs and character as being either out of context or aberrational....

This campaign is coming down to two competing views of America. As it plays out, I think something very profound may be happening to Mitt Romney. Romney reminds me of a good many smart businessmen I have known. They live their own lives by a set of solid small-c conservative rules, but they are too busy solving smaller daily problems to think much about political conservatism as a coherent system. Such people often pay lip service to the left-of-center conventional media wisdom about big government and public morality even as they rigorously practice all the bourgeois virtues of thrift, hard work, neighborliness, sobriety, and sexual continence in their personal affairs.

....this very smart, very competitive man is facing an opponent who is perhaps the most rigidly ideological man ever to become president. Romney doesn't like what he sees happening to the nation, nor does he much like the person he is running against. Confronted with the problem of beating not just the person, but also the ideology, and then fixing what is broken, Romney may be discovering for the very first time that he is actually far more ideological than he ever thought he was.

I'm sorry but your being Jewish does not give you a monopoly on the question of holocausts. If that is an attempt to intimidate me into silence, it won't work. And, cryme a river over my Irish ancestors killed by my British ancestors just because they were Irish and stubbornly remained Catholic in Cork (cradle of the old and actually Catholic Irish Republican Army and its successful revolt against the Brit overlords).

I despise Hitler and his holocaust of six million Jews and five million others (mostly Catholics) not counting those killed in war. I have often posted here that, if anyone here gets any bright ideas about repeating Hitler's behavior against the Jews, they are going to have to physically come through Catholics here, starting with my fellow Knights of Columbus. We join the late Meier Kahane in saying: Never Again!

Do you grieve for the Poles and other Slavs that Hitler slaughtered as "inferiors?" For his political prisoners? For the Gypsies? Hitler was special as a mass murderer since he targeted specific ethnic/religious groups such as yours for extinction. Our "ally" Stalin slaughtered the Kulaks. How about their deaths. Hitler had an especially hostile attitude as to priests who resisted him. Read up on St. Maximilian Kolbe, a Franciscan said (perhaps falsely) to have been anti-Semitic BEFORE the war and before Hitler's crimes converted him (if he had actually been anti-Semitic)non the subjects of Jews and Judaism. Kolbe voluntarily offered to die in place of a Polish sergeant imprisoned at Auschwitz for assisting Jews o escape the Nazis, a man who had a wife and children. Kolbe was executed in August 1941 in the man's place by injection of carbolic acid into his blood vessels. The man he saved survived to 1995. Check out St. Maximilian in Wikipedia.

It is your fellow Jews who have coined the wonderful term Righteous Among the Gentiles. Read the works of the Jewish historian and Oxford professor Sir Martin Gilbert on the subject of righteous gentiles during World War II and the Holocaust. Ditto the works of former Israeli diplomat Pinchas Lapide. Ditto the magnificent eulogy delivered by Golda Meir (an atheist if I am not mistaken) at the UN on the occasion of Pope Pius XII's death in 1958. Should Gentiles not also be able to use the word holocaust where appropriate? Your relatives were murdered simply for being Jews by ancestry or, perhaps, also by your Faith. The babies, of your background, my background and every other American's background have been slaughtered for nearly four decades now under "color of law."

If it is a numbers game, five times as many innocent babies have been murdered as the number of all of Hitler's victims. We have stood idly by while abortionists here killed more babies than the entire number of victims of Soviet Russia and we are fast heading for Mao's record. How many before it qualifies as a holocaust??? We are not even including the even larger number killed by IUDs and abortifacient drugs. Each of these victims is being killed simply because of age. Is that not also an intolerable kind or murder?

Do you, as do I, despise Mao Tse Tung (75 million) and Lenin/Stalin (50 million dead innocent victims)? The numbers are from historian Robert Conquest's The Human Cost of Communism in China and The Human Cost of Communism in Russia. He also wrote one on Ho Chi Minh and Vietnam but I do not recall the numbers.

Nor does losing relatives to Hitler give you special standing. You may want to defend Romney but you cannot very well deny his (and his father's and his mother's) lifelong devotion to abortion. You may want to hallucinate that he suddenly became credibly pro-life in 2004, but that he had no control over including abortions at a mere $50 a pop in Romneycare and putting Planned Barrenhood on Romneycare's board, apparently permanently. But he SAID he was pro-life. He wouldn't lie, would he???

The holocaust (and no other word will really do) of the American babies has reached 55 million by surgical abortion alone in this country alone since 1973. Each and every one of the 55 million an innocent human life, just as innocent as any victim of Hitler and just as human. I lost an uncle (a half German uncle) whose US destroyer was torpedoed and sunk by a Nazi U-Boat off Salerno (the USS Buck). That does not give me any special status either. In a rare occurrence, every male relative of age for the service then enlisted to fight Hitler. One wound up in American Samoa. The rest fought Hitler. Most agreed with Patton that Stalin should have been next. In that event, there would not have been a Mao in power.

Are you as "severely offended" by the death of my uncle who was killed by Hitler's navy? His widow was my godmother and, had he lived, he would have been my godfather. He had the privilege of dying in combat against Hitler as did your grandfathers (assuming they were killed in the European Theater of Operations).

AND you have the effrontery to tell me as the relative rookie that you are in this movement to which I have devoted my entire adult life that I am "content to allow a Marxist to destroy the economic future and ideals of this country..." and that "the rest of" YOU will be doing what you can to secure the future and freedom without me. I have much longer and much deeper roots in this movement than you do or ever will.

I am accusing so called “conservatives” who said in 2000, 2004, 2008, and now 2012 to put my conservative principles aside and just “give them another four years” to find the perfect conservative candidate who can win a national election

That does not make any sense what so ever. You put your conservative principles aside to get a conservative candidate? I have no idea where you are coming from with that. You could have campaigned for and voted for any guy/gal that was on the ticket. Just what were you doing in all these elections? One really major glaring problem with what you said is the last time I checked The GOP won in 2000 and 2004 and at one point controlled all three houses where were you? Don't you remember Bush/Cheney, hanging chads, algore freaking out, John Kerry Heinz in bunny vacuum suit, swiftboating, etc? I know of no conservative that would tell another conservative to put aside their conservative beliefs for a perfect conservative candidate. Just how would that work? Your either in some weird political bubble of people I have never heard of or you are just making stuff up now. Or you have been BSing all alone and you just got busted by your own slip up.

Time is up. Your decision is based on the past, and mine is for my future.

If you never learn from history you will always repeat the past. What kind of future is that besides making really bad choices while trying to reinvent a workable wheel each time. My decision is all about the future and is based on what the candidate believes in, what his/her polices are, what their past record tells me about them, most importantly how their principles line up with my principles and core beliefs.

Bottom line is as John Quincy Adams says: Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.

Wow you get called out on your lies and the best you can do is falsely accuse me of more of your fake BS. Once again you are projecting your own lack of principles on to me. Sorry dude that’s your idea you defend it. It is not mine and never was. You are once again proving lying is the only recourse for those that sell out their own principles when confronted with truth and know their core beliefs are up for the lowest bidder for political expediency and with that fact your only avenue to defend your traitorous betrayal of your own principles is to falsely accuse people of beliefs they do not hold to try and make your pathetic case for being a complete sell out of your country and fellow citizens to tyranny under the guise of quasi-freedom.

I am well grounded in my conservative beliefs and in my principles of Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness as laid in our Bill Of Rights, The Constitution, and our Declaration of Independence and I understand what the Declaration is saying in that “The US Declaration of Independence states that God Himself bestowed our rights and liberties upon us. The entire American political experiment is based on that unique premise. No other bulwark exists to safeguard the natural rights of human beings except Divine sanction. Remove God, and you also remove all claims to liberty, rights, meaning and purpose.” Tell me where it says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” which one of those truths are you willing to sacrifice so that you can attain your political goals while making slaves of those who have no voice and can not defend themselves making sure that all are created Un-Equal so your political ideology can reign supreme and you will somehow later fix all that. Right keep on believing that lie because once in power they will go to any lenghts in making sure they stay in power. When voting for Un-Principled liberals whether Republican or Democrat it always has disastrous consequences for the freedoms for our entire Republic.

And just how are you going to deal with Romney once he is in power? Threaten him with a recall if he doesn’t start behaving like a conservative? Threaten to not vote for him for re-election? You can’t withhold money from him he is already bought and paid for. Threaten him with a third party candidacy run? Just which of those options are you going to use to deal with Mitt? Plus since you sold out principles to vote for him how are you going to energize the base? Tell them this time you are really mean it and that you are for freedom and that your principles now come first so you have to do something about Mitt? Once you sold out I really don’t see the base rallying to your sunshine patriot cause. And what do think Mitt is going to be doing while this going on? He is going to use the machine and all the power that you gave him to squash you.

Tell me what greater good can government actually do than protect those that can not defend themselves and do not have a voice for themselves? Or is the Principle Of Life some of those values you can throw away when it is convenient for your political purposes?

I believe in and can stand up for my principles anytime but can you? I am sticking to my conservative principles which include fighting against tyranny, socialism, communism, etc, economic freedom from big government, and while I am at it I am fighting for lives of the innocence of those who are in the womb and have no voice are you? Bottom line Pro-Abortion equals death to the innocence and in doing so you are shredding all the stated clauses of the purpose of the Constitution that guarantee freedom to all individuals whether it is supported by a Democrat or a Republican. But hey you are okay with depriving others of their freedoms and lives so long as your political agenda is achieved with no regard for the welfare of your fellow citizens.

When it comes to smaller government Mitt is out to lunch again with Romney Care which is Obama Care so how can you be anti federal imposed mandates and smaller government but you are willing to support state imposed mandates and bigger government intrusion in our lives? They are both government mandated to take the choice of economic freedom from each individual citizen. How long before Romney State Care becomes Romney Federal Care so that nation wide standards can be imposed?

Your own guy Mitt Romney at the GOP convention stated the he, Mitt Romney, wanted Obama to succeed. That he would be happy if Obama succeeded. So now you have your guy saying he would be happy living in Socialist, Marxist, Communistic state so long as Obama’s socialist ideas were implemented and were a triumph at a of lost of freedom. So what country would Mitt be really happy being after America has transformed by Obama’s Socialist success? Just what country would Mitt be happy for America to be now under Obama’s Socialist, Marxist, Communistic success China, Cuba, Vietnam, Syria, The Congo, North Korea? Oh wait I thought you were against tyranny, socialism, communism, but your guy Mitt is for all of those if he wanted Obama to succeed. Once again your selling out your principles for political expediency and supporting a guy that supports Obama who supports tyranny, socialism, and communism, etc. If Obama Socialist America had succeeded would Mitt be now speaking at the DNC Convention in North Carolina in support of Obama? This is Mitt he is your idea. You defend him.

If Mitt were a real Capitalist he would not have made that statement and he would know that American as free enterprise capitalist republic could never thrive and succeed under the Socialist Ideas of Obama. There is no way it could be accomplished because the two are so diametrically opposed to one another. Bottom line Mitt should know that but he didn’t. Instead having a teachable moment defining Capitalism Vs Socialism espousing the virtues of Capitalism and when the free enterprise system is unleashed from government bureaucratic control that it can succeed beyond our wildest dreams creating more freedom but instead he decided to settle for cheap idiotic sound bite to take a shot at Rush. (Yeah he really coming to those conservative ideas. /sarcasm off)

Bottom line once again it comes down to principles. Either you have them or you don’t. Wise Up!!! School’s Out!!! Like Mark Twain and George Washington said:

• “Each of you, for himself, by himself and on his own responsibility, must speak. And it is a solemn and weighty responsibility, and not lightly to be flung aside at the bullying of pulpit, press, government, or the empty catchphrases of politicians. Each must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, and which course is patriotic and which isn’t. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide against your convictions is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let man label you as they may. If you alone of all the nation shall decide one way, and that way be the right way according to your convictions of the right, you have done your duty by yourself and by your country hold up your head! You have nothing to be ashamed of.”
- Mark Twain
• “If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disprove, how can we afterwards defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. The event is in the hand of God.”
— George Washington

af4dubya:

At least we have brushed the foam off the beer and are down to the real issue that you are frustrated because serious conservatives refuse to be Romney pom pom girls. Being relatively new to conservatism, you are in a panic over Obozo and hoping against hope that even something named Romney will stave off the wolf for four years. Then what? More Romney? Maybe we could run a ticket of Olympia Snowe and Mike Castle? Maybe nominate Hillary (Medusa herself) and Charlie Manson so that "we" can win!!! Its just the latest GOP version of the quadrennial DIRE EMERGENCY to scare the troubled rabbits back into line behind the latest purveyor of greed for the trust funders and provider of contracts and riches to the GOP-E and protection for the fudgepackers and babykillers while issuing pious pronunciamentos in denial of the grisly reality that is the accommodationist GOP. I don't have a horse in that race either at least as to trust funds and contracts and no one who is pro-life or pro-marriage has a major party horse in this race either.

I was listening to some montage of statements by Ronaldus Maximus on Mark Levin's show tonight. The one that struck me was something to the effect that Reagan hoped that after he was dead, he hoped to be remembered for appealing to our better instincts. He succeeded at that and is also remembered for his strength, his grace and courage under fire, his genuine personal humility and consideration (mopping up his spilled urine while recovering from the assassination attempt rather than expecting a nurse or orderly to do that), his remarkable spontaneous sense of humor and for being, by far, the best POTUS and best human being in that office in our lifetimes.

And yes, I realize that Mark Levin (almost my contemporary in Young Americans for Freedom), Hannity (a wind tunnel who continually proves that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing compared to adequate knowledge) and to a lesser extent El Rushbo are all falling all over themselves to lead the quadrennial panic.

Romney needed some coverage for his naked pro-death career if he was going to gull the suckers and run for POTUS. So he CLAIMED to have become pro-life in reaction to the embryonic stem cell issue. This is analogous to someone like Obozo CLAIMING to become a born again fiscal conservative because he refused to pay the tab (out of gummint or campaign funds) for local police protection at his Westport, CT, fundraiser a month or two ago. No credibility in either case whatsoever. As to Obozo, he isn't fiscally conservative, like most leftists, he is simply too cheap to pay his own bills. He is taking it to a new level by refusing to pay out of campaign funds or even out of federal government funds. Golly, it is like the days when LBJ ordered a policy of turning out most White House lights at night to, ummm, save money.

As to Romney (the more serious question since we expect more of GOP candidates), hallucinating that he did become "pro-life" over the mini-issue of embryonic stem cells being farmed for infanticidally selfish adults, please to explain his cramming $50 abortions into Romneycare and putting Planned Barrenhood on its board TWO YEARS after he CLAIMS to have become "pro-life." Did he Etch another Sketch??? Was he physically captured by Demonrats, tortured, and forced at gunpoint to include those $50 abortions or was being a Myth of Destiny on "health care" and sucking up for approval from the Boston Globe and its owner the New York Times and SeeBS, NBC, ABC, et al. (Isn't Romney WONDERFUL? He is just like us!!! The leftist establishment chants in one voice. Now that he is GOP nominee, not so much) soooooo important to Myth that he sold the babies' lives and his soul down the river in spite of being "pro-life" and banking (one should pardon the expression) that GOP-E money applied liberally enough in the way of mega slander campaigns would cover his tracks??? I'm going with the last alternative. Remember Occam's Razor??? The simplest answer is likely the correct one when considering multiple explanations?

Ohhhh, be still my beating heart! Myth is a "capitalist," is he? Well, if vulture capitalism counts, I suppose so. Can we dare hope to touch the hem of his garment? Warren Buffett and Bill Gates are capitalists too and both are a darn sight more successful than Willard but I don't want either of them (both are leaving their estates to Planned Barrenhood according to their own published statements and are moral monstrosities) running my country either. Let's leave the baby butchering where it belongs, in the Demonratic Party, along with support for "gay" everything, gun grabbing, weak kneed foreign policy, and an economic policy that favors ONLY the wealthy trust fund babies (why DO so many megabucks boodlers support Obozo? Are they "Marxists" too? Or is Obozo gulling the suckers as well? Again, Occam's Razor) and the ever growing welfare class?

If you don't think we can handle four more years (which you are going to get no matter which of these enemies of civilization "wins" in November), have you chosen your new country yet?

In appointing the usual gang (or maybe a truly UNUSUAL gang) of GOP-E airheads to the courts (with GOP Senators panting to please him as they would not for Obozo), maybe Romney will ultimately be responsible for MORE innocents murdered than was Hitler. How many David Souters, Sandra Day O'Connors, William Brennans, Earl Warrens, John Paul Stevens, Lewis Powells and Herod Blackmuns must the GOP-E put on the SCOTUS to convince you of their homicidal intent toward babies of modest means? You want to talk "class warfare?" That's the real class warfare and it has taken 55 million lives to date. Of course, Obozo is no better and that is the problem. At least GOP senators will tie up his nominees. If they stay in continuous session, they can prevent recess appointments. It only requires a senator or two to stay in Washington to keep the senate in session.

Now, as to your final question, I am convinced that God protects drunks, cripples and the USA (not necessarily in that order). He will provide IF He still wants this nation to survive. If He doesn't, nothing you or I can do will stay His judgment. Before I sell you on anything, you will have to get your head together on issues and agendas. That is how we spent sixteen years being ridiculed while building the force that nominated and elected Ronaldus Maximus. It was not easy but it was well worth doing. Ask those freed from the gulag archipelago. Ask Russian Jews who were freed to go to Israel. Ask Nicaraguans who were freed (at least for a time) from Danny Ortega. Ask the American medical students rescued in Granada. Ask Cubans who had fled Castro. In 1984 and 1988, we WERE BETTER OFF than we had been in 1980, by a long shot. And we did not get there by cowering in a corner hoping not to be noticed. And we survived Jimmuh Peanut and drove him from office in well-deserved disgrace, having, truth be known, let Ford be beaten although I am ashamed to admit I voted for that brainless POS but I was young and foolish then. I won't be foolish again.

Finally, have you ever read the ravings of Margaret Higgins Sanger, founding mother (she should pardon the expression) of Planned Barrenhood? Try her Pivot of Civilization and her constant example of a mythical Brooklyn Jewish lady named Sadie overburdened by all those children and in need of being saved from having more, or the works of her far more talented propagandist, Dr. Lothrop Stoddard, a Harvard alumnus, her "official" and enthusiastic observer at the Nazi Eugenics courts for her American Birth Control League which later became Planned Barrenhood) at the Nazi eugenics courts). He wrote any number of despicable works. One was entitled: The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy. Also check on books like The Passing of the Great Race by another of her chums, Madison Grant, an alumnus of Yale and Columbia Law School. That book was used as a defense exhibit at Nuremberg to justify the murder of your relatives See the Legacy section on Wikipedia for Madison Grant as a reference to that. Hitler called it his "bible" in a letter to Grant. Check both Stoddard and Grant out on Wikipedia.

If and when you familiarize yourself with these monsters, ask yourself why elitist Myth has been so chummy with them over the years. Then you will have an easier time with the term Mittler.

BTW, did you know that there were abortionists convicted of crimes against humanity at Nuremberg? Google: Nuremberg Trials/Abortion and look for the link to Human Life International's "Facts of Life: Chapter 5: The Holocaust Analogy to Abortion. HLI is a sober and quite respectable pro-life group.

May you read the sources I have offered you and may you be blessed!

“I am not comparing Mitt Romney to Hitler.

The man vetoed anti-life legislation. That’s on record.”

~ ~ ~

I fell for this one too. Doesn’t line up with Mitt
sharing...his mother was courageous for supporting
abortion~! I posted the video on a Romney is for women
thread.

This is what actually happened. Romney is back to...0 record...for life. He has only legislated against life and for abortion.

Mark Shea:
August 24, 2012 at 11:52 am

He vetoed it secure in the knowledge that his veto would be overriden. Then this happened: http://townhall.com/columnists/terryjeffrey/2012/02/02/creators_oped/page/full/

“On Dec. 7, 2005, a week before the law was to take effect, the Boston Globe ran a piece headlined: “Private Hospitals Exempt on Pill Law.” The article said the state Department of Public Health had determined that the emergency contraception law “does not nullify a statute passed years ago that says privately run hospitals cannot be forced to provide abortions or contraception.”

Public Health Commissioner Paul Cote Jr. told the Globe: “We felt very clearly that the two laws don’t cancel each other out and basically work in harmony with each other.”

Romney spokesman Fehrnstrom told the Globe that Romney agreed with the Department of Public Health on the issue. The governor, he said, “respects the views of health care facilities that are guided by moral principles on this issue.”

“The staff of DPH did their own objective and unbiased legal analysis,” Romney’s spokesman told the Globe. “The brought it to us, and we concur in it.”

The Globe itself ruefully bowed to this legal analysis. It ran an editorial headlined: “A Plan B Mistake.” “The legislators failed, however,” the Globe said, “to include wording in the bill explicitly repealing a clause in an older statute that gives hospitals the right, for reasons of conscience, not to offer birth control services.”

Liberals joined in attacking Romney’s defense of Catholic hospitals. But that defense did not last long.

The same day the Globe ran its editorial, Romney held a press conference. Now he said his legal counsel had advised him the new emergency contraception law did trump the 1975 conscience law.

“On that basis, I have instructed the Department of Public Health to follow the conclusion of my own legal counsel and to adopt that sounder view,” Romney said. “In my personal view, it’s the right thing for hospitals to provide information and access to emergency contraception to anyone who is a victim of rape.””

Unless it is true, and it is. Playing the "race card" against the likes of Planned Barrenhood and Margaret Sanger and Lothrop Stoddard and Madison Grant likewise works for me. Mittler himself certainly belongs at DU and, given your disingenuous defense of Mittler, so do you.

You control YOUR side of the conversation (if that is what this is) and I will control mine whether that pleases the GOP Party hacks or not. Is the tn part of your handle also obsolete or do you also break out the pom poms for the likes of GOP-E stooges LAMAR!!! Alexander, Bob Corker and your former governor and Tennessee state income tax proponent Donald (tax the peasants 'til they bleed in service to GOP-E) Sunsquish. I don't doubt the dedication of the three of them to Mittler. Birds of a feather and all that.

Try to address the obvious point. People such as Myth Romney, by supporting abortion and its funding throughout their public careers, have bought off on 55 million surgical abortions since 1973 in the US alone to date in which 55 million innocent babies have been sliced, diced and hamburgerized with no end in sight. Would you excuse Hitler as something like the new Bismarck and responsible for murdering "only" 11 million innocents because of their ancestry for the most part? Kulturkampf and all that, don't you know?

What is Mittler who has gladly embraced 55 million deaths of innocents and counting: a pro-choicer (gag me with a euphemism), a social "moderate" (ditto), a man of reasonable plans to continue eliminating inconvenient peasants, a brainless twit who imagines that pro-lifers and actual conservatives will buy his lies? I am going with Mittler which is a very good fit for him and his track record.

You don't care about my credentials??? I care about yours, if any, other than party hackdom. Care to share? I did not think so.

Tell me, while you are at it, about Mittler's record of accomplishment as to: military service of himself, his father, his sons, his devotion to the lives of the babies, his support for the exclusive right of marriage reserved to one man and one woman per marriage, his sterling efforts on behalf of Taxachusetts gun owners, his reduction of taxes on ordinary folks (not his zillionaire pals and corrupt $$$ boodlers), his courageous defense of GOP National party rules encouraging grass roots issue folks to get involved in the GOP and not be silenced at conventions by the GOP-E (and no, I would not touch Ron Paul with someone else's ten foot pole but his delegates and everyone else's have a right not to be stifled by the money meisters), his careful frugality with taxpayers' money to prevent the GOP-E from gorging themselves at our taxpayer trough, his foreign policy militancy, his noble but non-existent resistance to globaloney generally and "global warming" mythology specifically and to other envirowhacko schemes employed to stifle legitimate competition and further shift the tax burden to ordinary folks, his credible commitment to causing petroleum to be pumped ASAP in North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas, Illinois, Ohio, New York and other new strikes to take an axe to the obscene current gasoline and heating oil costs, ditto coal, ditto natural gas and prove he is something more useful than Obozo in whiteface and GOP drag (there I go again offending you by playing a "race card!") Give me his "Republican "resume. I did not think so. Too bad, if you don't agree, don't read it. Myth Romney and those who have fatally compromised the GOP by sitting still for his nomination can go straight to hell!

I was a Reagan state chairman when he challenged the last Romney GOP-E twit (Gerald Ford) in 1976 and I confess the sin of voting for Ford in the finals in November, 1976 lest the boogieman get me, according to the long-standing GOP-E mythology. Carter's miserable track record made Reagan the compelling choice in 1980.

Sometimes, I reference him as Myth which is also true but insufficient. Also, as Governor Etch-a-Sketch which is a perfect fit for the serial lying and murderous, "gay" everything supporting, gun grabbing, Catholic and other pro-life church persecuting, grandfather of Obozocare etc., SOB.

It would appear that you would accuse Mittler of being a Republican. I won't. I started voting GOP for POTUS in 1968 and have never deviated until this year. I don't give a tinker's damn about the fate of Muffy's trust fund but I care verrrry much about Mittler's purchase of the GOP nomination with corrupt cash and his issue heresies against the GOP platform and Western Civilization.

The answer to your question is that we are AT LEAST four years away from electing a conservative POTUS as a result of Romney buying the GOP nomination this year with corrupt Wall Street money funding his primary campaign of lies, smears, libels, slanders via an obscenely funded advertising campaign that can only be described as carpet bombing of every actual Republican and every actual conservative.

In 2012, I cannot offer you a certain candidate for 2016 or for 2020 for that matter, only a process. I would gladly back Sarah Palin but I am not convinced that she will run. I would gladly back Marco Rubio. Likewise Michelle Bachmann. If Josh Mandel defeats Sherrod Brown in Ohio and acquits himself well as a senator, he should be considered. The only New Englander worthy of consideration would be Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. I am not as eager as are some for Chris Christie but if he cleans up his judicial appointments act and maybe even takes out Lautenberg in 2014, I would give him a look. Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina has promised to retire by 2016 when he would be 64 and, if available, definitely worth considering. South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley may be worthy of consideration and, if she does seriously conservative things as governor AND has no skeletons in her closet, is a great image candidate. Like several of these, I do not know enough about her right now to be sure. If we really want a business type, there is Herman Cain although that 9-9-9 baloney is appalling and is a scheme to further afflict the afflicted and comfort the trust fund babies. Herman seems like a great guy other than that. There are certainly others.

Now I realize that most or all of them are supporting Myth this year and that is no recommendation. Better they should have kept silent. They did not and we have to have a candidate. There are plenty of potential candidates which was one major problem this year. Therefore, conservatives need a winnowing process to arrive at the one candidate WORTH supporting. We need a new process. It should have many new features.

First and foremost: To hell with the lamestream media in primaries or in elections of POTUS. No debates involving SeeBS, ABC, NBC, MSLSD, etc. No New York Ties, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, LA Times either. The Jim DeMint sponsored debate at South Carolina should be the model. Too complex and too wonderful to explain here at length. Limit the number of debates. Only the junkies are watching these a year before a convention. Academics of reliable ideology are the ONLY questioners. Princeton's Robert George or Hoover Institute's Victor Davis Hanson are good prototypes.

We need a limited list of indispensable minimum criteria as to issues. Pro-Life, pro-family and marriage of the one man and one woman kind only (no fudgepackers' lib), pro-gun, pro-Israel, judicial nominations of solid capable wingers or leave vacancies until the courts bleed, no craven arms deals, photo ID to vote, tough no nonsense foreign policy, strong as hell military, very tough on trade to reclaim American blue collar jobs and an industrial base for our economy, the spoiled trust fund babies can go to the end of the line when it comes to tax goodies, a stringent culture WITHIN the party that treats excessive carpet bombing advertising campaigns as the political equivalent of child rape. Ideas and ground war and not dollars are the standard starting on election night 2012 and then ever afterwards. Fail to meet any of these and you are shunned. No phony last minute conversions either.

Leaders of conservative issues groups (ACU, NRA, Tea Party, Veterans' groups, Right to Life groups, and all the rest) shape up or ship out. This is ideological war not pattycake. Politicians: It is not about YOUR jobs, YOUR contracts and YOUR personal profits and perks or a gold watch after fifty years taking up space to no discernible good end. Be prepared to vet the candidates on your groups' main issues and seek consensus accordingly. Do THIS a year before the convention and choose the consensus candidate, discouraging all others. Mobilize the political troops, nominate by unprecedented land war, destroy the leftist Demonrats now that we shall deserve to destroy them.

How's that for starters?

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.