Posted on 05/07/2011 11:03:19 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
We should put things in the context of how and when things happened. Romney deceived lots of people. I wonder how much Cain actually knew about Romney before he supported him.
Also, people are speaking out against Scott Brown. Lots of conservatives were for him when he ran because his opponent was Ted Kennedy. Defeating Ted Kennedy was monumental.
With that being said, I’m kinda tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils. We need good, solid, conservative candidates who has the courage and wisdom needed to go after Odumba and the liberals.
I didn’t want McCain to win the MA primary. I was for Thompson but he dropped out the previous week. I voted for the most conservative man available. I wasn’t given much choice by the worthless republican leaders who were pushing the least conservative man possible: McCain.
Cain’s support of Romney could’ve earned him a ZOT here on FR.
You said “politically you are what you endorse.”
That’s pithy. Retarded, but pithy. Don’t waste my time.
Well said!
**********************************
You'll never be here long enough to justify being rude to EV, newbie.
Cain’s support of Romney came late in the primary when the choices were meager. Nice try, but no stogie.
Somehow I knew you couldn’t handle it too direct.
I think you are missing a certain key point. Politically, you have to actually win an election first. I know that is never an impediment in your support of Keyes, but at the end of the day, someone wins the election and that person assumes the reins of power that seat accords to him or her.
The idea that “Nutritionally you are what you eat and politically you are what you endorse” has so many flaws I didn’t know where to start.
So I’ll start here: given the choices of Mitt, Huck and McCain, who did YOU endorse and YES, for purposes of this discussion, you have to choose one of those thre.
And given the choice of chitlins or tripe to eat, which one will you turn into?
Just following YOUR logic.
This is what is known as a false choice.
We're Americans, and we ALWAYS have a choice.
This ain't the Soviet Union, at least not yet.
Even if y'all act like it is.
No. The "choice" you're offering is between strychnine and cyanide. Lots of folks have wised up to that, and won't be coerced into drinking your RINO Kool-Aid any more, thanks.
These kinds of threads just make me feel tired. Let’s not pick the nits of ‘08. ‘10 showed us we can win with the right temperament and the right message; I’d say Cain has a lot of both. I liked the guy even before the debate.
>>> No. The “choice” you’re offering is between strychnine and cyanide. Lots of folks have wised up to that, and won’t be coerced into drinking your RINO Kool-Aid any more, thanks.>>>
That is sooo childish. What do you mean the choice “IM OFFERING.” I didn’t offer this choice. (I owned the website BeatJohnMcCain.com at my own expense just to try and keep him from being the nominee. ) The choice was what it was, and it was the result of voters choices, not mine, not Cain’s, not even the GOP or the RNCs. VOTERS IN PRIMARIES.
Herman Cain didn’t offer this choice. He simply endorsed Romney out of those three when the race got to that point. So yes, it was strychnine and cyanide. But that was not Cain’s choice and it was not my choice.
So please Genius, what would you want him to do when asked that question? Say he voted Bob Barr? Ron Paul?
>>>> Even if y’all act like it is.>>>>
Who is “yall” exactly? What do you mean? What are you talking about?
Hey, you’re trotting out the same old crude, coercive, unprincipled RINO talking points, so, why wouldn’t I just lump you right along with the rest of them?
Name one RINO talking point I have made.
The whole lesser of two evils, you have to vote for our RINO because you have no choice, fallacy. You've spread it all across this thread. IOW, RINO talking point number one.
Like I told you before. I'm an American, and I don't have to do anything, especially in response to being presented lying, false choices, or in response to coercive, crude tactics.
If you insist on presenting compromised, unprincipled candidates you can go take a flying leap.
You totally missed the whole point. I only said that Cain’s choice of Romney when the remaining candidates were Romney, Huck and McCain was not the same thing as being “pro Romney.” And it’s not. It is simply the answer to a question: choose A, B or C.
It is childish and illogical of you to equate that to actually liking any of the 3.
I never said YOU should like any of them. I simply said you were wrong to say that Cain’s choice made him “pro Romney” and certainly not pro “Romney Care.”
O for 1. Next.
No, you don’t understand. He didn’t have to “pick” any of them. But, for whatever reason, he did pick one. The one who just happens to be the most liberal Governor in history.
Such decisions call his judgment and his principles into question.
And his stated reasons for doing it are lame. Really lame.
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.