Posted on 01/20/2010 2:42:05 AM PST by tlb
I saw that too last night and was amazed that they considered themselves committed lib/dims but still wanted govt out of their pockets, lives and healthcare - just like my deceased father-in-law fm RI - it’s like a cultural, ethnic kind of association - has NOTHING to do with rational, intelligent thought...
Agreed.
Freepers must learn never to make the perfect the enemy of the good.
And as for being pro-gay stuff - regardless of his stance on gay marriage, I doubt highly he’d be for repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell”...or I’d be surprised if he was for it...we’ll see...
Very well put!
Look at anyone who is tops in their trade, a mechanic or a plumber or an electrician, and examine their tools. They don’t have one for every job, but rather a collection of different tools. What makes them good at what they do is not only using the proper tool for the job, but knowing what tool is needed!
Seems to me it’s much the same with politics. You have to use the tool that’s right for the job. In this case that tool is Scott Brown. But that doesn’t mean the same tool would work in Alabama, or Ohio, etc.
FReepers must also learn to quit accepting half a s*&t sandwich for political sustenance simply because they're hungry to win.
FReepers must also learn to quit accepting half a s*&t sandwich for political sustenance simply because they're hungry to win.
Good job. You two have perfectly identified why politics is known as the art of compromise. :0)
Well, it makes sense. Compromise is for whores and lawyers. It’s a natural fit.
Scott made nice promises. Right now keeping our borders safe is the most important. Think about it, if we're not safe then we won't be around to worry about capitalism or abortions.
The only way Scott can keep his promises is if we work with him, not against him. We need to unite, not nit pick issues. He's not perfect, no one is. Should we become dissatisfied with him, all we would have to do is question "What would coakley do?". The answer would set us straight.
Scott said "It's the People's seat". We The People need to use that seat, not let it collect dust and rust. We need to work with Scott. He's the first best we have right now and with him, other good people will rise up. It is time. This is the beginning.
For the most part, FR doesn’t turn on anyone. Brown will be what he is and we will point it out. I am under no delusion that he is not a RINO. But I have a open mind. When he starts rubbing elows with John and Olympia that will tell all....
For the most part, FR doesn’t turn on anyone. Brown will be what he is and we will point it out. I am under no delusion that he is not a RINO. But I have a open mind. When he starts rubbing elows with John and Olympia that will tell all....
Seems to me Rush, Sean, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, etc. are more interested in getting an “un-liberal” in that seat than they are in getting credit for something.
If we let who got the job done more important than getting the job done then we're up the creek. Your admonishment "Let’s give him time" needs to be repeated. As often as necessary!
Later today or tomorrow.
Latest the day after he gets sworn in.
“Just because he won does not mean he should be immune to critizism.”
The election was yesterday and isn’t even final yet. Can’t you even wait 24 hours to tearing him down?
And while i have seen Freepers say there was a REASON that Sarah Palin didn’t endorse him, i heard her say herself last night on Greta, that she WOULD have, but he didn’t ask her to, and she figured that his going it alone was working for him, so no need for her to jump on his bandwagon. So that should put to rest any notions of freepers who think she withheld her support for him because he wasn’t conservative enough.
It will probably happen the first time he breaks ranks with the GOP or discusses the possibility of doing so. And in all likelihood, he will deserve the criticism he gets.
The time for purity tests is in the primaries. If we hope to ever regain majority status we need to support the candidate in the general election who won the most local support. He has to campaign in his state not in ours, and those are the voters he/she must convince not you or me. We need to remember that in the land of the blind the one eyed man gets elected.
It depends on Brown ... when he steps off the path, he will be called on it. I’d want nothing less for any one of our public servants.
I have been thinking about posting the exact same sentiment for days now! As a Romney supporter, I was overwhelmed by the hypocrisy of many Freepers with Scott Brown. And Jim Robinson has indicated that he was OK with people voting for Scott Brown, despite not being the perfect anti-abortionist (in JR’s mind anyway), so long as they “hold his feet to the fire” on abortion. And yet, with Mitt Romney, the same stance got him labeled a “murderous, Socialist monster.” I guess not all “murderous, Socialist monsters” are equal, huh?
IMO, he is a MOAB dropped in the middle of democrat party. Now it is up to the ground troops to do their jobs.
He made it very clear last night what his mindset is and will be when he is installed as a Senator. I think it is notable that he shied away from mentioning Conservatives or Republicans when giving thanks but instead chose moderates and independents.
At this point, I’m not going to look a gift horse in the mouth but we should not be cowed into silence about his political make up.
He’s actually to the left of where Romney is today.
But the anti-Romney stuff was never really about what Romney believed today, for at least a good number of his most vocal critic here.
Brown won’t be running for President — that’s a big “real” difference. However, he could well vote against our desires on issues. Does anybody know what his view is on amnesty, for example?
He’s pro-abortion, but probably with us on any votes that would come up in the senate on the subject. He supported a conscience clause, and opposes partial-birth abortion at least, and I doubt he’d support the “freedom of choice act”.
He sounds quite conservative fiscally, and is pro-2nd-amendment. He’s in the squishy middle on climate control, believing we should fix it, but not liking the anti-business cap-and-trade bill.
He’s against gay marriage, although he does consider it settled at the state level (he had no interest in pushing for a referendum again for example). But I doubt he’d vote to repeal DOMA, so he’d still probably be a reliable vote. He might well vote for hate crimes legislation though.
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.