Posted on 01/23/2012 6:54:16 PM PST by LonePalm
Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson just endorsed Newt Gingrich for the Republican nomination.
The announcement was well done too. Go Fred!
The announcement was well done too. Go Fred!
I'm painfully aware of the flaws of all the candidates this primary season, but I can't give Romney any serious consideration based on his history of flip-flopping on abortion. That's a deal-breaker for me.
At this point, Gingrich looks like our best chance of defeating Romney. I wish we had better alternatives, but the choice is between Santorum and Gingrich, and unless something happens quickly for Santorum, Gingrich will be the last alternative left to Romney.
The question for me is first, who can defeat Obama in the general election, and second, who can defeat Romney in the Republican primaries. I realize since both of us live in Missouri, it's more complicated for us (as it also is for voters in Virginia) because Gingrich didn't get on our state primary ballot — and while the Missouri nonbinding primary is coming soon, by the time the Republican caucuses get held in Missouri, the race will likely be over.
62 posted on Monday, January 23, 2012 10:55:33 PM by Charles Henrickson: “At this point I am undecided between Romney and Gingrich. There's lots that I like about Romney, and there's lots that I like about Gingrich. I cheer for both men when they say something good at a debate. I also recognize flaws in each man, I have reservations about each. I think they're pretty much on the same page on the issues. Either one would be much, much better than Obama. I'm ABO. The main question for me is which one has the better chance of defeating Obama. May the best man win.”
Yea, I thought Duncan Hunter was the best conservative then also. But the majority of American citizens, some dead and in the grave, voted for the obamanation of America's desolation and his hope and change. And so every one who voted for him has their part in bringing in the sorrows that we all suffer under the regime of the evil man. I believe that Rick Santorum is the best conservative running and would do his best to return America to a semblance of freedom and justice and family values, but DC is a barrel of rotten apples and needs to be replaced. I also believe that will not happen until God in the person of Jesus Christ, my Lord and Savior of those who believe Him, when He returns after the 7 year tribulation to rule and reign over the earth as the Holy King of God the trinity in Israel, His beloved. The Father will make all His enemies His footstool for 1000 years and then God will burn the whole earth and create the new heavens and the new earth He said He would at the end of tribulation as the book of Revelation foretell us who believe the Scriptures.
“The knife wounds in Fred’s back that he got from Mittens must have healed after four years. Good.”
Did the ones he got from Dr. Dobson heal too?
I found our local station reruns the old L & O with Hill, Moriarity, Brooks, etc.. Moriiarity complained the show took the leftist slant when either Dick Wolf or Rene Balcer got involved.
I’m not sure if I agree with that because (apologies for actor names not character names) Sam Waterson is a big Lib as is Stephen Hill. Even Anthony Anderson, Benjamin Bratt and Linus Roache who portray “Conservatives” are caricatures.
Stop with your nonsense and victimhood mentality. You simply can’t - no one can.
LOL! You actually think I'm trying to persuade you? I guess I think more of you than you do of yourself - that you are a grown up and can think on your own. So I see now you're not with that comment! I think you're just an attention seeker. Bye troll.
103 posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2012 1:26:19 AM by Charles Henrickson: I should add, reading a bunch of “FU”s, enraged pejoratives, capital letters, and exclamation points directed against a candidate does nothing to persuade me. In fact, it has the opposite effect. Reasoned discussion would be much more persuasive.
Rev. Henrickson,
You and I are both not only evangelical Christians but also members of confessional churches. That means truth for us is not mere sound bites but rather involves detailed examination of issues, realizing that human sin corrupts everything and very few issues are purely black-and-white — most issues are very seriously tainted with sin on all sides and nothing is good except God alone. While my adherence is to Reformed doctrinal statements and yours is to those of Lutheranism, we're both used to the idea that truth needs pages to convey correctly, not a few sentences.
So let me appeal to you as a fellow confessional conservative. I happen to find this Free Republic thread helpful by a pastor who personally knows Gingrich and has endorsed him. The author has taken the time to write a very detailed evaluation of Gingrich's spiritual condition, and while I continue to have concerns, the post is something that should at least be considered by those with continuing questions about Gingrich.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2822096/posts
Romney may have been the best the Republican Party could offer in Massachusetts, and I understand that to win elections, we sometimes have to vote for people who we don't like very much because the alternatives are worse. But voters in the rest of America are far more conservative, and the best we can get elected in Massachusetts is a lot different from the rest of America.
Do we really have to settle for a Massachusetts moderate who told his audience in a debate when running for governor that he's been pro-choice for his entire political life and that was the position of his own mother when she ran for office decades ago in Michigan (my home state, by the way)? There are other things wrong with Romney as well, but for me, abortion is the deal-breaker. If we can't trust Romney to be a solid pro-life conservative, can we trust him to appoint judges to the Supreme Court who will be more committed to pro-life positions than himself? The primary purpose of the civil magistrate is to protect the people under his rule, and protecting the lives of babies from baby-killers is a pretty minimal standard which Romney, not many years ago, was explicitly denying.
I can make a very long list of what I believe is wrong with other Republican candidates, but the fact is that Gingrich won South Carolina — a state I still can't believe he won — and he won it by a wide margin. That means he probably can win the rest of the South.
As socially conservative evangelicals, we're probably going to have to make our peace with the fact that Gingrich, flaws and all, is going to end up as the only viable alternative to Romney.
Don't ask me to be happy with that. I'm not. But if we can't win elections, we can't govern, and right now it looks like Gingrich has shown he can win an election in a place where I'm very surprised he was able to do so. That makes him, at least for now, the most viable alternative to Romney.
I'll definitely reconsider if Santorum gains traction, and in Missouri I have no choice but Santorum because Gingrich isn't on the ballot. But at least for now, we'd better as Christian conservatives figure out how we're going to deal with a President Gingrich or we're going to end up with a President Romney or (even worse) a re-elected President Obama.
Now how did Fred get John McPain’s permission to do that?
bump to the top
Rev. Henrickson is a Missouri Synod Lutheran minister with more than a decade of participation on Free Republic.
He's not a frequent poster on the political threads, but he is no troll.
A side point to everyone, me included: We as conservatives need to deal with the fact that the level of our discourse on the internet is not ... ahem ... very much like that of the Federalist Papers. People who think and write like the authors of the Federalist Papers act the ways the Founding Fathers acted.
People who don't think and write that way don't act that way, either.
That's a lesson all of us need to remember. Let's leave the trash talk and destructive discourse to the liberals. They're good at it. We shouldn't try to emulate them.
I wouldn't characterize Hannity's show as a prop mill for Romney. Hannity has been fairly critical of him, especially of late.
I understand what Charles is saying, and know that he speaks for a lot of good, solid conservative freepers who don't do much posting.
Thoughtful discourse is a very difficult thing to manage on this board, and sometimes is best avoided if you're not a group thinker.
Fred looks better now than he did four years ago. Or else my eyes are worse and there’s too much glare on the screen. :)
Also it seems like Hannity is coming around to the love of Newt.
Newt/Fred would make an acceptable ticket.
“Amen to your thoughtful post, darrell. I understand what Charles is saying, and know that he speaks for a lot of good, solid conservative freepers who don't do much posting. Thoughtful discourse is a very difficult thing to manage on this board, and sometimes is best avoided if you're not a group thinker.”
Thanks for your thanks, ohioWfan, but more importantly, thank you for the service of your Bronze Star recipient. None of us would be able to talk the way we do on Free Republic if it were not for the freedoms for which our soldiers fight.
As for the internet and groupthink — Yes, I realize the problem, and I definitely do **NOT** blame this forum. It's a problem all over the internet and Free Republic is much better than most places.
As the son of a Republican politician who has spent virtually all of my entire adult life working in the news media, I think it's not impossible to use “mass media” forums to educate people and try to bring up the standard of discourse beyond sound bites.
Some people will tune that out. Lots of people tuned out the Founding Fathers, too. But they managed to create a country based on the work of those who **WERE** listening.
Today's internet is much like the “penny press” from a century and a half ago — virtually anyone can say virtually anything and get an audience, subject only to the truth that the owners of the press decide what gets printed. Furthermore, the people who yell the loudest often get the most readers, as men like Hearst and Pulitzer found out. That's not a bad thing if we believe the Founders were right about the First Amendment and about the right to private property.
Let's look on the good side of that. We conservatives aren't confined to sitting back and writing stuffy articles in conservative political journals that get read by almost nobody outside academia and the upper levels of the political parties and news media. We can reach hundreds of thousands of people who actually vote, and who actually know neighbors who vote and go door-to-door to get them to vote.
That's a Republic in action, and it's a really good thing.
Nothing’s perfect, and I'd rather deal with the problems of internet discourse than deal with the problems of the liberal control of a largely monopolized news media that we had not very many years ago.
Good for Fred (my 2008 candidate); good for Newt.
BTTT!
Thanks for your posts, Darrell. I’ll come back to them later. Gotta run now.
“Only the complete condemnation of the one and the uncritical praise of the other is allowed. “:
FR will not be used to promote Romney or bash Newt. If you don’t like it you are free to post somewhere else.
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.