thank you!
Posted on 01/08/2012 8:19:39 PM PST by STARWISE
So let’s go down a list of issues, and I bet my conservative views trump yours...so by your standards, they are automatically correct and beyond reproach. My “libertarian” views are more free market orientated, along the lines of a muilton friedman.
Nope. It's called being highly principled. Nothing on this Earth will ever get me to cast a vote for Mitt. He will do nothing to turn our Republic towards Liberty. He will just be a placeholder until the next Marxist takes power.
Never again will I vote for Statists.
AGAIN: this IS a conservative NOT a libertarian site.
Romney is NOT a conservative.
Educate yourself:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2830444/posts
#11 Mitt Romney has been a huge supporter of gun control laws.
#12 Mitt Romney once claimed that he was more "pro-choice" than Ted Kennedy, but now he claims that he is pro-life.
#13 During this campaign season, Mitt Romney has stated that he only supports partnership agreements for gay couples and not gay marriage,
#14 As late as 2007, Mitt Romney was a member of the Republican Main Street Partnership. The following is what romneyexposed.com says about this organization....
#15 According to the Huffington Post, Mitt Romney has raised more money from lobbyists than all of the other Republican candidates combined.
#16 Mitt Romney is a big time Wall Street insider. It is estimated that Romney has a personal fortune of approximately a quarter of a billion dollars, and Wall Street money is being absolutely showered on his campaign.
-———Crickets———
Related:
Who is Mitt Romney
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2739309/posts
###
Excerpt:
Republicans recently have watched multiple Romneys at war with each other over abortion, ethanol, global warming, and more. Alas, this is nothing new. Various Romneys have battled themselves on issues as old as the Vietnam War.
“I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam,” Hawkish Romney said in the June 24, 2007, Boston Globe while running as a conservative for 2008’s GOP nomination.
But Romney sang a softer song while campaigning for Senate in liberal Massachusetts. “I was not planning on signing up for the military,” dovish Romney said in the May 2, 1994, Boston Herald. “It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam.”
Just last week, Romney spooked pro-lifers by refusing to sign the Susan B. Anthony List’s pledge to nominate anti-abortion judges and other federal officials. Romney properly noted that this promise might block, say, a pro-choice spy master from leading the electronic sleuths at the National Security Agency, which does not address abortion. Still, this dustup underscored Romney’s bipolarity on this key issue.
“I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother,” pro-life Romney wrote in the July 26, 2005, Boston Globe.
But less than three years earlier, in October 2002, pro-choice Romney disagreed: “Let me make this very clear. I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose.”
“Government under President Obama has grown to consume almost 40 percent of our economy,” pro-enterprise Romney said June 2. “We are only inches away from ceasing to be a free-market economy.”
“I support the subsidy of ethanol,” rent-seeking Romney said on May 27 in Iowa, however. “I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution for this country.”
Four days earlier, former governor Tim Pawlenty (R, Minn.) bravely opposed ethanol subsidies in Iowa. Nonetheless, Romney bear-hugged this boondoggle — weeks before the U.S. Senate voted 73–27 on June 16 to terminate the ethanol tax credit.
“I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that,” CO2-fighting Romney said on June 3. “I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants, of greenhouse gases, that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and global warming that you’re seeing.”
Romney earned a wave of the scepter from none other than the pope of the global-warming church, former vice president Albert Gore Jr.
“Good for Mitt Romney,” Gore wrote on June 15. “While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party.”
“Governor Romney,” CNN’s John King asked at a June 13 GOP debate in New Hampshire, “constitutional amendment or state decision [to ban gay marriage]?”
“Constitutional,” replied traditional-values Romney.
Conversely, modern-values Romney, said in an Aug. 25, 1994 interview with Boston’s gay newspaper Bay Windows: “The authorization of marriage on a same-sex basis falls under state jurisdiction.”
Gun-toting Romney called himself a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association in April 2007. (Actually that “lifetime” began in August 2006.)
Gun-controlling Romney declared in 1994: “I don’t line up with the NRA.”
Sportsman Romney said in 2007: “I’ve been a hunter pretty much all my life.” A spokesman clarified that Romney actually had hunted precisely twice: At age 15 and in 2006.
“Ronald Reagan is . . . my hero,” the Gipper-loving Romney said in 2005, as the Boston Globe’s Scot Lehigh noted on Jan. 19, 2007. “I believe that our party’s ascendancy began with Ronald Reagan’s brand of visionary and courageous leadership.”
“I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush,” Reagan-bashing Romney said in 1994, while running against the late senator Edward Moore Kennedy (D., Mass.). “I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.”
You do know Milton Friedman was Reagan’s chief economist do you not? So apparently, not only was Reagan not welcome on FR, he was not as conservative as you, nor a conservative in general? You’re being silly. I would like to hear how you came to think I classify Romney as a conservative, when every reference I have of him explicitly calls him a weak republican..maybe it is you who should educate yourself.
Back who you want, but tearing down the likely nominee is just dumb. Turn potential voters off from candidates and help reelect obama..apparently that is the true meaning of conservatism!
Like I said, I’m willing to bet that for the most part, my conservative leanings lean a bit more fringe right than your own.
You’d be betting wrong. I don’t have ‘conservative leanings.’ I AM a conservative.
What are you smoking? What do Milton Friedman and
Ronald Reagan have to do with Romney?
Matters not to me if you care or not, but here’s an FYI from the owner of this site:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2793300/posts
Fringe is accurate, you were backing Romney, at least until recently.
Like they say, a libertarian is a leftist with more conservative economics.
You brought up my statement on libertarianism, I simply addressed it. A conservative going out of their way to turn off potential voters by smearing a likely nominee and reelect Obama....we have a differing opinion on Conservatism. I at this moment do not even support Romney, I personally like Santorum, but if Romney gets the nod, I will not think twice about voting for him and getting Obama out of office. My beef is that you can advance your candidate without making it that much harder to elect whoever gets the nomination.
Thank you for posting that. It is nice to be reminded of MittBot’s position on the key issues.
Wrong. In none of my past posts have I ever backed Romney. I just find it amusing that he may get the nomination and many will either have to eat their words and vote for him, or not vote for him, essentially helping Obama.
Nothing worse than an enemy within.
NO ROMNEY, NO WAY.
GOP-E beware.
Saving. Thanks STAR!
“Support the Republican nominee whoever he may be.”
BEARS REPEATING. Unlike repeating 2008.
You cite as evidence that I back him, a quote of mine in which I call him a weak Republican? LOLWUT?!?! The point was, that any of the candidates would be better than obama. So if he gets the nomination you’ll 1)vote for romney, 2)write in your candidate 3)not vote?
Two of those help Obama and go against advancing Republicanism. A weak republican is better than a democrat. if you were trying to make me feel bad in thinking that I prefer a republican no matter what, over a democrat well, then you fail.
“Wrong. In none of my past posts have I ever backed Romney. “
To: Free ThinkerNY
Social security, medicare/medicaid, welfare and public schooling are all programs that should not financed through the government. A conservative having a conservative view now is a sign of failure? Romney, I was backing you, but this outlandish decree is nonsense.
7 posted on Wed Sep 07 2011 20:28:37 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) by BloodAngel
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.