Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WE ARE NOT COMING BACK!
Patriot Thoughts ^ | April 12, 2013 | Rabbi Steven Pruzansky

Posted on 07/06/2013 7:07:24 AM PDT by Dick Bachert

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky

(Rabbi Steven Pruzansky is the spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey.)

“The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo – for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, Economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility.

And fewer people voted.

But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.

Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.

That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.

The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff.

Every businessman knows this; that is why the “loss leader” or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama’s America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who – courtesy of Obama – receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.

The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which “47% of the people” start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money – “free stuff” – from the government.

Almost half of the population has no skin in the game – they don’t care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese.

They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else’s expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.

It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.

That engenders the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that the electorate is ignorant and uninformed. Indeed, it does not pay to be an informed voter, because most other voters – the clear majority – are unintelligent and easily swayed by emotion and raw populism.

That is the indelicate way of saying that too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich.

During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: “Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!”

Stevenson called back: “That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!”

Truer words were never spoken.

Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” – without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” – without ever defining what a “fair share” is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” – without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending.

Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws.

He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone.

Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.

Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil’s bargain of making unsustainable promises.

It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups.

If an Obama could not be defeated – with his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future.

The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy – those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe – is paved.

For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama’s future at America’s expense and at Israel’s expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin.

A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the US will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative. The US will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon – and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality.

But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent empire, nor is there is an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline.

Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come.

The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution.

If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.”

The Problems We Face Today Are There Because The People Who Work For A Living Are Outnumbered By Those Who Vote For A Living.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: elections; obama; welfare
ALL the problems discussed by the author are a DIRECT result of a warning we failed to heed from over 200 years ago concerning HONEST "MONEY".

"Blood running in the streets. Mobs of rioters and demonstrators threatening banks and legislatures. Looting of shop and home. Strikes and unemployment. Trade and distribution paralyzed. Shortages of food. Bankruptcies everywhere. Court dockets overloaded. Kidnappings for heavy ransom. Sexual perversion, drunkenness, lawlessness rampant. The wheels of government are clogged, and we are descending into the vale of confusion and darkness. No day was ever more clouded than the present. We are fast verging on anarchy and confusion. (George Washington in a 1786 letter to James Madison, describing the effects of fiat paper money inflation then ravaging America in the pre Constitutional period.)

"The annihilation (of the paper money) was so complete that barber shops were papered in jest with the bills; and sailors, on returning from cruises, being paid off in bundles of this worthless money, had suits made of it, and with characteristic lightheartedness, turned their loss into frolic by parading through the streets in decayed finery which in its better days had passed for thousands of dollars." (Contemporary writer, Breck, 1786)

"Paper money polluted the equity of our laws, turned them into engines of oppression, corrupted the justice of our public administration, destroyed the fortunes of thousands who had confidence in it, enervated the trade and husbandry, and the manufactures of our country, and went far to destroy the morality of our people." (Peletiah Webster, 1786)

"When the servants of the people are paid in something other than that which the people themselves produce, the roles of master and servant will be reversed." Thomas Jefferson writing in opposition to the early effort by "Friends of Paper Money" to foist an unbacked, fiat money system upon the people of the United States.

If you don't fully understand those warnings, let me know and I'll send along a full explanation.

1 posted on 07/06/2013 7:07:24 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

> “Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.”
CORRECT.

> “Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.”
WRONG.

Post-Election statistical surveys pinpointed by regional demographics that it was the old ‘Perot Bloc’, the blue collar mostly white working class that stayed home, rejecting Romney as they did G.W.H. Bush #41 years ago.


2 posted on 07/06/2013 7:14:59 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

A sobering read. I still hold out hope that there may yet be more of us than there are of them..and that younger people are starting to grasp the magnitude of the problem and continue the fight. I’m not ready to have the epitaph written just yet. But we have some extremely tough fights on our hands to keep it from happening.


3 posted on 07/06/2013 7:16:36 AM PDT by SueRae (It isn't over. In God We Trust.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Yes, Romney lost because of the “free stuff”. But he also lost because the GOP establishment prefers to keeping control of the party over actually winning elections. Therefore, viable conservative candidates were carpet bombed into oblivion if they entered the race or simply intimidated out of running in the first place.

The end result, more conservatives stayed home on election day 2012 than the conservatives who stayed home on election day in 2008 because they couldn’t stomach McCain. And, that is exactly how the GOP establishment likes it. Allow the Tea Party and the grass roots to take over and the entire party establishment loses their power/control base. That’s FAR more important than things like freedom, the free market and self determination.


4 posted on 07/06/2013 7:19:21 AM PDT by Buckeye Battle Cry (Audentis Fortuna Iuvat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Romney lost because he was Obama lite. Romneycare=Obamacare - Big Government. My wife and I held our noses and voted against Obama, but not for Romney. We know many who just couldn't because of the same reason.

In each of the loosing elections I've heard the following phrase "I'll reach across the aisle" from the Republican candidates. When I hear that, I think of the word "Milquetoast", "RINO" and see a stealth Liberal/Progressive in Republicans Clothing.

No Romney lost, not because the Democrats bought the election (and they did buy a lot of votes), but because Romney's past caught up with him (RomneyCare and Gay Marriage). And the fact that these two belied his "conservative" message.

5 posted on 07/06/2013 7:20:05 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

I see no mention of the widespread, blatant fraud carried out in key swing states.


6 posted on 07/06/2013 7:20:43 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty (Endowed by my Creator with certain unalienable rights!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, Economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility.

Sounds like a reflection / projection of the majority of the electorate. (incompetent, apathetic, and irresponsible). We get the government we deserve.

7 posted on 07/06/2013 7:23:21 AM PDT by Fzob (In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
I see no mention of the widespread, blatant fraud carried out in key swing states.

What voter fraud ?

Says Eric Holder

8 posted on 07/06/2013 7:34:05 AM PDT by Popman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

“Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate”

wrong.

The electorate is starving for a leader who holds and champions these values

Romney lost because he was not articulate and inspiring about those principles.

He may be a good man and a good able leader, BUUUT

with rare exceptions, Mitt’s public persona is that of an insipid elitist milktoast from a strange secretive quirky religious cult who had no fire in the belly to lead this nation and who stayed constantly on defense
Mittens kept his mouth shut about Barry Benghazi when he had the chance to stand up for those dead souls.

NO RINO will be able to inspire with these values because they don’t hold them except as campaign slogans.

LOL... democrats are better at using these values as hooks and they don’t even believe in them


9 posted on 07/06/2013 7:36:29 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age Takes a Toll: Please Have Exact Change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
The key paragraph

Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.

As long as this country continues to bring in 1.2 million legal immigrants a year, 87% of whom are minorities as classified by the USG, it will continue to descend into a third world country and tribal politics.

10 posted on 07/06/2013 7:43:15 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Yup. I have had my tag line up since the election. While the GOP has gained in the House, Governorships, and state legislatures, the inability to win a majority of the Presidential vote since 92 -except for 2004- is distressing. I suppose we could take some heart that the GOP would probably control the Senate if it weren’t for some terrible candidates, but ....does anyone really trust the GOP after the Rubio fiasco?


11 posted on 07/06/2013 7:48:18 AM PDT by MattinNJ (It's over Johnny. The America you knew is gone. Denial serves no purpose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Republicans lost because they led the way in exporting our economy of jobs and factories to the rest of the world. Abandoned by the international interest corporations in search of world wide profits, our citizens turned to government. Those that rely on government vote for Democrats. Restoring American jobs will restore the voters who elected Reagan to vote Republican again. Success breeds Republican voters, unemployment breeds Democrats. Washington Republicans thought that by screwing Obama they would screw Democrats, instead they screwed themselves.


12 posted on 07/06/2013 7:52:47 AM PDT by ex-snook (God is Love)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

Romney lost because of massive voter fraud and the fact that the moochers, looters and inner city tribal parasites outnumber the producers. This country has gone from land of the free and home of the brave to land of the free stuff and home of the depraved. You are living in a dream world if you think otherwise. You would be better served spending your time and resources preparing for the horror that is coming.


13 posted on 07/06/2013 8:02:33 AM PDT by SVTCobra03 (You can never have enough friends, horsepower or ammunition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Dick, your comments to this article included:

“Blood running in the streets. Mobs of rioters and demonstrators threatening banks and legislatures. Looting of shop and home. Strikes and unemployment. Trade and distribution paralyzed. Shortages of food. Bankruptcies everywhere. Court dockets overloaded. Kidnappings for heavy ransom. Sexual perversion, drunkenness, lawlessness rampant. The wheels of government are clogged, and we are descending into the vale of confusion and darkness...”(George Washington in a 1786 letter to James Madison)
-
That Washington quote is inaccurate, at least to that reference.
That text does not appear anywhere in the letter that you cite;
and I am unable to find it anywhere properly attributed to George Washington.
-
http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/constitution/1784/madison2.html
-
I do see that some parts of of your attribution are there:
-
Mount Vernon 5th Novr 1786.
“My dear Sir,...”

“...No Morn ever dawned more favorable than ours did
and no day was ever more clouded than the present!
Wisdom, & good examples are necessary at this time
to rescue the political machine from the impending storm.
Virginia has now an opportunity to set the latter,
and has enough of the former, I hope, to take the lead
in promoting this great & arduous work...”

“...Without some alteration in our political creed,
the superstructure we have been seven years raising
at the expense of much blood and treasure, must fall.
We are fast verging to anarchy & confusion!
A letter which I have just received from Genl Knox,
who had just returned from Massachusetts is replete
with melancholy information of the temper & designs
of a considerable part of that people...”

“...Thirteen Sovereignties pulling against each other,
and all tugging at the fœderal head,
will soon bring ruin on the whole;
whereas a liberal, and energetic Constitution,
well guarded & closely watched,
to prevent encroachments,
might restore us to that degree of respectability & consequence,
to which we had a fair claim...”

“...With sentiments of the sincerest esteem & regard
I am—Dear Sir Yr Most Obedt & Affecte Hble Servt
Go. Washington...”


14 posted on 07/06/2013 8:16:11 AM PDT by Repeal The 17th (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
I saw nothing wrong in this Article. Makes all sense.
I will enforce and celebrate this Dilemma by drinking a 6 pack now, in the morning at 9 o'clock, to forget.
But my hope is reflected in the next Post:::
"UK astronomers to co-ordinate their search for alien signals."
15 posted on 07/06/2013 8:20:30 AM PDT by Koracan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

Yes aprox 6 million working class whites sat home. 2016 is unlikely to be different. But by then I imagine we will be in total economic collapse or CW11 so it won’t matter.


16 posted on 07/06/2013 8:26:11 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SVTCobra03

OK, we all know what the problems are. The question is, “Can it be fixed?” If so, how?


17 posted on 07/06/2013 8:28:17 AM PDT by Walrus (America died on November 6, 2012 --- RIP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

It’s too easy to draw such conclusions offered by Rabbi Pruzansky in Patriot Thoughts and amplified by yourself in comments. Particularly if your in a position to deal with the artificial increasing costs of everything which have been created by socialist policies and its resultant regulations which run across the board. Unfortunately those conclusions are also being drawn by those in control of the apparatus of the Republican party who are in search of the most perfect “demographic”.

And that “perfect demograpic” is showing the way out of dependence on the system which created it. Not condemming those forced to rely on it

It doesn’t seem to dawn on advocates of these positions as costs contunue to increase that they are the result of endless edicts and thousands of pages of endless regulations restricting resources which is comming close to even engulfing those taking that position. But they have already engulfed those on limited incomes to the extent what sub assistance the maker of those increases offers namely the government are taken because of necessity.

In socialism it is the government and those who are in control of it but the powers that be in opposition can’t and didn’t even mention that word during the 2012 campaign and refuses to do so now.


18 posted on 07/06/2013 8:28:37 AM PDT by mosesdapoet (Serious contribution pause.Please continue onto meaningless venting no one reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

I was never a Romney fan, but I voted for him and by the end of the campaign thought he ran it excellently. America as was founded is over, time for the new patriots to do what it takes to survive. Starve the beast whenever possible, overwhelm it when possible. We are a captured operation.


19 posted on 07/06/2013 8:33:04 AM PDT by stevio (God, guns, guts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Americans voted for the status quo

The status quo was the represented by both major parties on the ballot.

20 posted on 07/06/2013 8:33:57 AM PDT by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning...

Especially if there is no conservative on the ballot.

21 posted on 07/06/2013 8:35:11 AM PDT by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
I see no mention of the widespread, blatant fraud carried out in key swing states.

DING DING DING!!! Right on. Exactly how is it in several parts of Ohio that Romney received ZERO votes, whereas Obama received 115% - 125% of the registered vote?

Nope, no election theft going on here, move along --- nothing to see!

22 posted on 07/06/2013 8:36:47 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye Battle Cry
Yes, Romney lost because of the “free stuff”. But he also lost because the GOP establishment prefers to keeping control of the party over actually winning elections. Therefore, viable conservative candidates were carpet bombed into oblivion if they entered the race or simply intimidated out of running in the first place.

Much truth in what you wrote. I'd add that having 32 bazillion debates between the 94 candidates that were running (exaggeration of course) certainly didn't help matters. By the time it came down to Romney v. Obama I don't think there was a single person in this country who didn't already have their mind made up as to which way they were going to vote - or not vote and stay home.

Anyone claiming to be an "independent" or "undecided" did it for the media attention IMO, dumbasses that they were.

23 posted on 07/06/2013 8:40:52 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

>”The People Who Work For A Living Are Outnumbered By Those Who Vote For A Living”<

While everything else in the Article made perfect sense, the line above fits the bill.

The only exception being that a bunch of people who “work for a living” still buy into the Obama mantra.


24 posted on 07/06/2013 8:43:23 AM PDT by Kickass Conservative (They can follow the Communist, I'll follow the Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

They just don’t get it. The Romney ‘campaign’ didn’t run a campaign which is why they couldn’t compete. If you want to compete you have to show up to the fight and for most of 2012 Romney didn’t and when he did he said really stupid things that didn’t help him and I’m not talking about the 47% comment which has been given far more credit than it deserved. It was more his series of comments like saying “I’m proud to be called the grandfather of Obamacare” etc. That is really inspiring to those 2010 voters. What Romney did was play the ambiguous card and lost while Obama ran out to his base and rallied them hard to the polls. The GOP upper echelon are idiots in the marketing department. They should have the strongest brand in America. The brand that forged America. The value of hard work, the striving to be ones best even if one is born with the least, the building strong families which through their strength strengthen individual liberty and community and deflate the need for big govt. The GOP and Romney suffered from being muddled in 2012. Its like the geniuses with the money said we just won big in 2010 and then just disregarded all that produced that win. Its crazy but that is why the GOP is the stupid party.


25 posted on 07/06/2013 9:00:18 AM PDT by Maelstorm (If all are treated as suspects it will not long before we all are treated as prisoners.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

Romney or any republican loses because the dems start with over 200 guaranteed EVs from the NE and Cal. and then just have to win 10-15 major cities in the swing states. It’s that simple. Unless the GOP govs and legislatures change the electoral distribution to house districts rather than by the state as a whole we are doomed to losing all future pres elections.


26 posted on 07/06/2013 9:02:08 AM PDT by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

Thanks for the POSSIBLE corrections.

As we both know, “progressive” historical revisionists and what Roger Sherman correctly called “...the friends of paper money...” inhabit EVERY CAMPUS in the US today. My concern is that they also infest the UVA.

We have had many such purging of materials these creatures consider hostile to their demented ideology. One such occurred under FDR, to wit:

Historian George Bancroft later wrote: “James Madison left his testimony that *the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making the bills a tender, either for public or private debts, was cut off.* This is the interpretation of the clause, made at the time of its adoption by all the statesmen of that age, not open to dispute because too clear for argument, and never disputed so long as any one man who took part in framing the constitution remained alive.”

(Bancroft – founder of the U.S.Naval Academy at Annapolis among other accomplishments – wrote a book on this very subject entitled “A Plea for the Constitution of the United States: Wounded in the House of Its Guardians.” During WWII, FDR – a serious friend of paper money – ostensibly to supply the war effort, ordered the printing plates for many historical books smelted. Bancroft’s book was among them. A photocopy of one of the remaining originals can be found here

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=bE7PP1ePQwgC&dq=Constitution+wounded+in+the+house+of+its+guardians&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=iiJ1_2B_IA&sig=ByRM-kVMIDAs4S5OttEqkCXGm8s#PPA4,M1 )

These people will stop at nothing to achieve their aims.


27 posted on 07/06/2013 9:23:14 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (Hitler would have LOVED obozo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.

All of those were contributing factors, as was the Etch A Sketch comment. Millions fewer voted, and they were mostly conservatives. Now, why didn't Romney appeal to conservatives?

28 posted on 07/06/2013 9:37:22 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Probably because, having spent far too much time in Massachusetts, he may have held conservative ECONOMIC values, but was NOT a real IDEOLOGICAL conservative.


29 posted on 07/06/2013 9:43:46 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (Hitler would have LOVED obozo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.

If he had been a strong defender of these conservative virtues, maybe the author would have a case. But Mittens Etch A Sketch tried to run as just barely conservative enough to keep people in the tent, while essentially he's a "progressive." Romneycare, remember? (Or Obamneycare, as someone dubbed it.)

In almost all of the primaries prior to the nomination being locked up, the conservative candidates (the Not Romneys) got around 2/3 of the vote, yet Romney kept winning. Conservatives were not and are not sold that Romney is a conservative in any way.

Had he been a real conservative, he might have gotten some of those millions of stay-at-homes to vote. Look at 2010. The Republicans ran mostly as full-spectrum conservatives, and they won BIG -- around 700 seats at various levels.

So of course, they had to nominate a "moderate". ("Moderate is a base-stealing word for liberal Republicans." -- William F. Buckley Jr.) After all, everyone knows that only "moderates" are electable.

Choose electability and you'll lose most of the time.

30 posted on 07/06/2013 9:44:16 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Great post.

Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.

The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff.

Perfectly stated.

31 posted on 07/06/2013 9:51:40 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, Economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility.

Normally in the case of a divided legislature and an insuffereable butt-hole as president we would have gridlock.

And with a tyrannical socialist as president it wouldn't be such a bad turn of events.

But in this case King Obama just does what he wants without regard for congress, court, law or constitution.


32 posted on 07/06/2013 10:14:41 AM PDT by Iron Munro (The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative
The only exception being that a bunch of people who “work for a living” still buy into the Obama mantra.

Because they don't want to have to work for a living - and they hope some day the Democrats will make that unnecessary. :)

33 posted on 07/06/2013 10:21:49 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Baloney.

The reason for Romney’s fail to elect are two:

1) Romney is not mainstream.
2) The employ-foreigners GOP does not win votes.

Bring back US jobs.


34 posted on 07/06/2013 10:27:54 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
I tend to agree with your comments.
However, when the Rabbi states: I'm not so sure about that.

Someone once wrote: First watch 8 minutes 16 seconds of video titled Romney defeated Obama - if not for voter fraud.

Then ... read and think about this. Someone wrote:
I don't completely agree.

Someone said, "We’re not victims or battered wives as someone else suggested"
Playing the victim? Really?

Yes we had a weak field.
Only about 38 percent of the Republicans supported Romney in the Primary.
So 62 percent voted AGAINST "Establishment Republican" Romney.
Who was it that dumped all those negative adds on Conservative Candidates in the primary?
Who was it that constantly battered each leading Conservative in the primary with an average of three to one negative ads against our real candidates?
Who's money was dumped against the conservative choices?

Victim? Do you really believe that Romney got ZERO votes in 68 Precincts? Do you really believe it was an accident that when some people voted for Republican candidate Mitt Romney, the machine appeared to change it to the Democrat candidate Barack Obama?

I believe there WAS ENOUGH Voter Fraud to throw the 80 Electoral College Votes from Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Florida.
I also believe that had Romney SAVAGED Obama, like he SAVAGED the Conservatives that ran against him in the Primary,
Romney would have gotten more votes in the General election.
So yes, it's Romney's fault, but there WAS ENOUGH VOTER FRAUD to steal the election for Obama. Do you really believe that Democrats didn't intentionally vote more than once for Obama?
Denying being a victim of voter fraud doesn't help.
But getting the criminal enterprise of the Obama Judicial System to prosecute the guilty who stole this election, is a lost cause.
Remember, it doesn't matter who has the votes, it matters who COUNTS the votes. Romney might have won, but with Obama's Criminals running the "Justice Department", they'll never admit Romney won.

Black States = States Obama won by Voter Fraud. Click the state for more information.

Dean Chambers of UnskewedPolls.com Creates Obama Voter Fraud Map

Photo Credit: Barackofraudo.com



35 posted on 07/06/2013 10:32:39 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Paper money based on nothing but faith is actually worthless.


36 posted on 07/06/2013 10:51:49 AM PDT by Mmogamer (I refudiate the lamestream media, leftists and their prevaricutions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative

The “. . . bunch of people who “work for a living” [and] still buy into the Obama mantra” are on his payroll!

He bought them before & after the 2008 election, and bought them (plus some new ones) again for the 2012 election.

They are ALL getting filthy rich at our expense!

I don’t need to point them out to FReepers — we know who they are, and they will have the resources to totally insulate themselves FRom the chaos that they know is coming!

And, We the People will be left with the aftermath! We will have to suck it up, pick up the pieces and rebuild America.

Maybe we can get it right on the rebound?


37 posted on 07/06/2013 11:40:13 AM PDT by Taxman (So that the beautiful pressure does not diminish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves

See my post #37


38 posted on 07/06/2013 11:48:12 AM PDT by Taxman (So that the beautiful pressure does not diminish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

And a testosterone-challenged Congress bends over, grips their ankles and intones “Thank you sir. May I have another?”


39 posted on 07/06/2013 11:51:41 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (Hitler would have LOVED obozo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson