Posted on 01/11/2012 10:05:45 AM PST by gabriellah
The Iowa Caucuses saw an upset in the polls last week as the GOP campaign season kicked into full gear. Although the outcome was in Romney’s, the voting margin between him and Rick Santorum was only by 14 votes. The upset? The projected winners at the beginning of the day were Romney and Ron Paul running neck and neck. And it wasn’t just CNN projecting that Romney and Paul would be in the lead.
Senator John Kerry
So why the change? Two words: Flip flop. Many will remember this term from the 2004 election when then-Democratic nominee John Kerry was deemed a “flip-flop” when confronted about his voting for the war before he was against it (amongst his many other flip-flopping shenanigans over the years). Voters are starting to realize that Romney has too many skeletons in the closet and has been nothing but inconsistent.
Just take a look at his voting record. He was for gun control before he was against it. He was for abortion before he was against. He was for mandating healthcare (and even took pride in Obama using a system that was similar to the one he implemented in Massachusetts) before he was against it. And the list goes on.
As a result, there is a clash between the Romney that ran four years ago and the Romney that is running today.
In fact, it’s so bad that even the Democratic National Party has caught on, creating a campaign ad elaborating on Romney’s numerous speeches in which he has fabricated the truth about his voting record and beguiled the American people.
So, if Romney is so wishy-washy, why do people like him? The answer: He’s a moderate. As indicated by recent polls, the majority of America wants Obama booted out of a job, come November 2012, and there are many libertarians, independents (and, in some cases, moderate Democrats) whose votes remain undecided. There is fear within the Republican Party that these votes will most likely not go to a conservative candidate, but a moderate or liberal Republican that the Republican Party desires to cash in on these votes to ensure they win the election. Their best RINO? You guessed it: Mitt Romney.
The effect of this could possibly cost the Republicans the entire presidential election. Despite President Obama’s socialist/Marxist views on government (and execution of those views with the help of Congress), the one thing he has done in his presidency is remain consistent. He helped promote Obamacare and still considers it one of the “crown jewels” of his presidency.
Now imagine a presidential debate with Mitt Romney and Barack Obama going head-to-head. Sure, Romney can throw some pretty low blows; but, his voting record is not only bad, but he has also lied about it on numerous occasions, whereas Obama is proud of every decision he has made. I can just hear Obama thanking Romney on stage for inspiring Obamacare.
This is a dangerous step. Conservatives stick to their morals and the Constitution, which, clearly, Romney has not.
Quite frankly, if Mitt Romney has been so flippant about the issues as a governor, he’ll likely be much worse in office as President. Do we really want to run the risk of losing the battle simply because Mitt Romney can’t decide which party he’s with?
We, as conservatives, shouldn’t have to settle.
We're likely going to, since we can't decide which Not Romney Flavor Of the Month we want.
Well his speech got an “RIGHT-ON RIGHT-ON” from El-Rushbo on a few points.
BOTH
Surely, the independent-minded citizens of the State of South Carolina will reject this "hand-picked" choice of Obama and the liberal Republican establishment.
We, as conservatives, shouldn’t have to settle.Yes, only to support, or to vote for, Willard Weirdo Romney, isn't "settling," which implies a less than optimal choice, because Willard Romney is no choice at all for a movement conservative whether principled or pragmatic. To vote for, or support, Willard Romney, who as an unremarkable single term governor delivered RomneyCare with all its new rules, new taxes, its exchanges, its public option, and its mandates, is an effective betrayal of the core premises of a conservative line on policy or governance.
Hell will freeze over before another liberal (Willard is not a moderate) republican is crammed down my throat again.
I will have no part of destroying whats left of the conservative wing of the republican party. I’d write in The Lone Ranger first.
The only effective candidate to oppose a "consistent" advocate of such "redistributionist" ideas (described in this statement as "socialist/Marxist" views) will be a candidate who is equally consistent in understanding and articulating why the U. S. Constitution prohibits elected leaders from assuming a coercive power to "redistribute."
Perhaps that is why it is Ron Paul that the young people are preferring, because he is, at least, linking the President's means of implementing his "redistributionist" ideas to a corresponding loss of liberty for individuals.
Gingrich, of course, is the person most able to make that link in the minds of youth and all citizens and become a statesman in restoring the founding ideas; but, unfortunately, Paul's ultra-libertarian views on other topics is giving him the edge with young people.
Please, South Carolina, assert your individual wills to stop the so-called "progressives" in the Republican establishment from picking your candidate for you--a candidate who exhibits an insufficient core understanding or passion for the ideas of Jefferson and Madison. Repeating trite and familiar phrases from patriotic songs and former Presidents is not adequate to the task.
Remember, the Fall 2012 Democrat on the ticket is passionately devoted to a core commitment to the 'other' philosophy, which was soundly rejected by America's Founders in favor of the future liberty of us all. At the time of the founding, a term for it was "leveling" (read Samuel Adams on the subject), but today it is called by other names.
The Republican ticket, in order to win, must be able to convince voters that Obama's philosophy is leading, and will lead, future generations into slavery to government. That candidate must convince voters to study the unique ideas and principles which made America the place of refuge for oppressed people; and then, once they've studied, to choose liberty over slavery.
2012 may be the last call for a clear choice; because neglect of the principles of liberty, combined with a determination on the part of those who prefer coercive power and 'rulers,' has brought us to this point.
Konrad Adenauer in post WW2 West Germany did very well as their chancellor from 1949 to 1963. He was 87 when he retired and lived another 4 years.
Ron Paul is a medical doctor, in good health, and realistic about the LONG length of time required to downsize the Medical Entitlements of Medicare, Medicaid, and the illegal Obama”Care.”
The medical doctor as Veep could in just ONE year set up the blueprint to downsize the medical entitlements, and still have 3 years to ram it down the libs throats. ( Say “AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH,” libs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
The odds are that the libs, (in “both” parties), will rally in 2016, and mount a massive reaction Campaign against President Willy Rom-Rom RINO.
But if Willy holds up his end of the “Vulture” bargain, and picks the bones clean on ALL the rotting crops in THE ENTITLEMENT PLANTATION, then he may be able to stay in office for a full eight years. Otherwise, the RINOs will be served Willy-Rom toast, and the cancer of Obamanation will again pollute our Republic.
BTW, Ron Paul would probably step down in 2016 and allow his son Rand to replace him as Veep AND continue thankless, ( except by us), task of keeping BIG Government RINO Romney on the Conservative side of the GOP Establishment RINOland. A DAILY “check and balance” system on BIG Government Willy Rom-Rom RINO. (Sort of a “Paul” cast over the flaming-lib tendencies of Willy Rom, the “Massachusettes Moderate.”)
BTW, BTW, REALITY knows no loyalty. Paul is the best AVAILABLE reality check to Willy Rom. So suck it up FReepers, and make the best of the cards that are being dealt, and DOWNSIZE the US Federal Government!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I an tried of hearing about candidates who are nothing more than professional polititicians who really have done nothing but run for office.
Scott Walker is out there doing something about his state. I would vote for him.
Yep. Had years to learn how to work the system and get the liberal communists Democrats with the MSM to buy him the Presidency. Shame on us for being fooled. Another closet King Obama.
I intend to write in George Washington for president and vote conservative on all other ballot measures.
"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton
That is why I go for Newt. Newt, as Speaker, really showed Americans what can be done to restore its belief in conservative ideas. He made some simple mistakes and Walker has made only one I can see. He should have continued his press to kick the Union our of Government. But I would vote for him also because he is a real American and faces the damage his State Government has done. Newt's new contract for America will cure many ails and he knows how to work this system we call Federal Government.
That’s why the Rats are so anxious to get rid of Walker, they know he could very well be a future POTUS candidate. If Walker said he was running for POTUS today, I would immediately endorse him.
No way. Newt didn’t carry through.
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.