Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Paul Ryan to 'values voters': If Obama wins, there's no going back
Christian Science Monitor ^ | September 14, 2012 | David Grant

Posted on 09/14/2012 12:56:43 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 last
To: Unc1e_Ivan
A vote for a third party “true conservative” candidate, or sitting at home on election day, is colluding with the enemy. Seriously. Each person needs to vote in accordance with his conscience and the conditions in his State. Nobody should mindlessly vote for Romney, especially considering the contempt with which he has treated conservatives.
51 posted on 09/15/2012 12:43:12 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

If Romney offered a correction, would you believe him and be satisfied?


52 posted on 09/15/2012 1:03:36 AM PDT by WOSG (REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMA. He stole America’s promise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Abortion and gun control. willard is on the wrong side of both issues and I won’t be able to vote for him as a result. From where I’m sitting, I think the election is not going particularly well for willard. Although I really don’t think its going to boil down to the south. I think its going to be decided in the midwest. If VA and FL go for hussein then it was a rout anyway.

Unfortunately if willard does lose, we can expect the willardites to spend the next few years blaming those of us who refused to line up for the willard wagon for that defeat. Rather than placing that responsibility belongs: on the shoulders of the gop and their abysmal candidate.

Oh well. At least with 20:1 odds it’ll be a fair fight.


53 posted on 09/15/2012 6:02:38 AM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Vote for willard - he doesn't need to earn your vote, he's entitled to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie; All

Sorry SCP, but the events of the past few days have converted me into a very grudgingly ABO voter. The President’s primary job is to deal with foreign policy and federative issues, and the differences between Obama and Romney have become very clear on these.

I understand where you all are coming from, however, and can understand why you still would not like Romney. I’m not going to join in the chorus of attacks on Goode voters that characterises many on here at FR.

But at this point, I just can justify not voting for Romney on the argument that “yeah, well, we *really* should elect a true conservative!!!” Yes, you’re right, we should.

But we won’t. I think the large bulk of conservatives in this country have shown that they’re not going to vote for a principled third party (yet, at least). As such, continuing to harangue them about it isn’t going to do much. It really IS between Romney and Obama, and as bad as Romney is, I at least want Obama out worse than I despise Romney. At least Romney wouldn’t be apologising to Islamists and allowing them to attack our embassies with impunity - something dealing with the President’s primary constitutional role.

My hope is that we get Obama out in 2012, and that by 2016 conservatives will have figured out that either the GOP needs to re RADICALLY restructured, or else it needs to disappear and be replaced. I think a Romney administration will be a great disappointment to most of these folks adamant for him on here and elsewhere, and maybe they will finally be willing to consider some alternative options.

Make no mistake, I’d love to see Romney be primaried and lose in 2016, or else have his party pulled out from under him by then. But for now - Obama has to GO. This isn’t just a matter of theoretics, it’s a matter of national life versus death at the present time.


54 posted on 09/15/2012 6:46:31 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Remember - Allah is an ancient Arabian moon god, and Muhammed was a pedo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat; All

One point I’d make is that whoever wins, will bring coattails with them that will affect downticket races. This has always been the case, and always will, and not just because of straight ticket voting.

Thus, if Romney loses, there’s a good chance that a lot of good, conservative Republicans on down their respective tickets will lose, as well. Which in turn means that Congress and the statehouses and the governourships will be Democrat enriched.

And THAT’S where a lot of the things you’re worried about really take place. As President, Romney wouldn’t just get to “make policy” on abortion and gun control. He could really only sign or veto bills presented to him by Congress, and would have to get his appointments through Congress. The downticket races will affect whether it is the Democrats or the Republicans crafting the bills that will go to his desk and whether a bad judicial appointment gets filibustered successfully or not.

So do we want Democrats sending gun ban bills to Romney’s desk, or do we want Republicans sending bills that will synchronise conceal-carry to all 50 states (as Romney said he wants in a recent NRA interview, take it for what you will)?


55 posted on 09/15/2012 6:57:05 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Remember - Allah is an ancient Arabian moon god, and Muhammed was a pedo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat

I agree with you about abortion and gun control. Homosexualism is also a huge issue for me.

So far as the current state of the campaign, I’m fairly convinced that Rasmussen does not change his standards to be partisan. He has it as a dead even race, so that’s pretty much how I see it.

It’s surprising that Romney is not farther behind given that he’s barely been fighting yet. He has allowed Obama to far over-spend against him here in Ohio, and it’s still even.

With the foreign affairs fiasco of this last week, I don’t see how Obama can survive, but it’s no telling what Americans think anymore. If I were the Republicans, I’d be targeting senior citizens and the not yet senior boomers like crazy with Obama’s failures in this area. They are the cold war generation and they will understand how Obama has weakened the nation. They won’t like it.

But, will Romney do it? Who knows. He’s not shown much gumption yet.

So, it all depends on if and when Romney decides to fight.

I’ve not heard a peep out of Goode on this that has made it into the media.


56 posted on 09/15/2012 7:05:48 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: xzins
"While Romney cannot get my vote"

In a perfect world Ryan would be on top of the ticket, but alas dear xzins, this is not a perfect world.

The Tea Party is gaining strength and influence in the GOP but is not yet mature enough to field its own candidate for national office, in the meantime we must make the best of our choices.

Not voting is an abdication; even if you decide not to decide you have still made a choice. That is, your choice not to vote is still a vote--for obama.

57 posted on 09/15/2012 7:09:32 AM PDT by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pietro

I will vote. Just not for Romney. But, I’ll attack Obama and only deal with Romney when he issues any kind of dumb statement on life, homosexualism, gun control, etc.

I simply reject that my vote is for anyone other than for whom it is cast. I’ve gone through that discussion so many times, and all it does is divert you and divert me from attacking Obama.


58 posted on 09/15/2012 7:56:15 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy

“I just can justify not voting for Romney on the argument that “yeah, well, we *really* should elect a true conservative!!!” Yes, you’re right, we should.

But we won’t”

No only wont we in 2012, but if Obama wins, we wont ever be electing the kind of conservative they demand ... ever.

Obama’s 2nd term will shift the policies so far left, and embed Obamacare and Obama’s regulatory statism and social policiy liberalism so far in, it will be the end of conservatism as we know it. Not just gay marriage and roe v wade for another generation, but much more beyond that. Andwith the dependent class expanded, the demographics shifting, its game over for the America we knew and loved.

Conservatives will be obsolete after Obama as the Czar of Russia was in the USSR. There will be no turning back.


59 posted on 09/15/2012 9:49:25 AM PDT by WOSG (REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMA. He stole America’s promise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy

“I just can justify not voting for Romney on the argument that “yeah, well, we *really* should elect a true conservative!!!” Yes, you’re right, we should.

But we won’t”

No only wont we in 2012, but if Obama wins, we wont ever be electing the kind of conservative they demand ... ever.

Obama’s 2nd term will shift the policies so far left, and embed Obamacare and Obama’s regulatory statism and social policiy liberalism so far in, it will be the end of conservatism as we know it. Not just gay marriage and roe v wade for another generation, but much more beyond that. Andwith the dependent class expanded, the demographics shifting, its game over for the America we knew and loved.

Conservatives will be obsolete after Obama as the Czar of Russia was in the USSR. There will be no turning back.


60 posted on 09/15/2012 9:49:40 AM PDT by WOSG (REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMA. He stole America’s promise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“I’ve not heard a peep out of Goode on this that has made it into the media.”

Goode serves only one purpose for the media. Helping re-elect Obama. He will only be mentioned if that publicity serves that purpose. So, for example, if he attacks Romney, then he will get attention. If he attacks Obama, nobody else will ever know.


61 posted on 09/15/2012 9:53:31 AM PDT by WOSG (REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMA. He stole America’s promise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Romney is at least “evolving” in the right direction on traditional values, unlike Obama who is “evolving” in the wrong one. There is objective difference between Obama and Romney, and Obama is far worse, from the standpoint of life and marriage, as well as the economy. To say that the two are “exactly the same” is patent nonsense. You’re helping Obama win if you sit this out.


62 posted on 09/15/2012 9:53:58 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

Well, that’s good to know!


63 posted on 09/15/2012 9:55:10 AM PDT by Luircin (Don't like Romney? Blame the conservative circular firing squad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
But at this point, I just can justify not voting for Romney on the argument that “yeah, well, we *really* should elect a true conservative!!!” Yes, you’re right, we should.

As you see fit Yashcheritsiy, I still cannot vote for any man/woman who supports either the Gay Agenda or Abortion.

I'm reminded of two things:

1. The Sunday School song: "Dare to be a Daniel, Dare to stand alone"
2. The thousands of Christians who died rather than give up their faith in Christ. If they, facing certain death, could remain to their faith, then I facing an uncertain future, can remain true to my faith and refuse to vote for either man because they are both not Christian and both are, to different degrees, supporting both Abortion and the Gay Agenda.

I cannot compartmentalize the political part of my life away from the rest of my Christian life, they are one and the same.
64 posted on 09/15/2012 4:06:08 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
That's fine - I just don't see voting for Virgil Goode as some "test of Christian faith." Frankly, I think that mere worldly politics is of too little importance to go attaching "faithfulness" to whether someone votes for Romney or Goode, or to presume that somebody is "spiritual" because they vote for my chosen political candidate.

I can see the point that Romney might very well not advance the abortion and gay agendas as President, or at least that he won't have opportunity to, while Obama certainly will.

65 posted on 09/15/2012 6:42:38 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Remember - Allah is an ancient Arabian moon god, and Muhammed was a pedo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Laura722; All

” - - - Ryan said in his speech that they intend to repeal ALL of Obamacare if I’m recalling correctly.”

Not so. EVERY GOP-Elite, including Ryan, always adds “replace” to their efforts against Obama”care.”

The average voter knows that we can’t afford Obama”care,” and that “replacing” Obama”care” will be something that we cannot afford either.

Hence, the average voter see “both” political parties as being the same, and will vote for the incumbent.

Thus, Romney/Ryan ‘choose to lose’ by “replacing” something that cannot be paid for.


66 posted on 09/17/2012 5:58:43 AM PDT by Graewoulf ((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
I can see the point that Romney might very well not advance the abortion and gay agendas as President, or at least that he won't have opportunity to, while Obama certainly will.

Romney's words THIS year and his own record speak otherwise.
67 posted on 09/17/2012 7:52:24 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I dunno, I doubt he’ll get the opportunity if a GOP Congress retains power - which, ironically, is much less likely to happen if Romney loses.

Gotta look at the bigger picture.


68 posted on 09/17/2012 8:53:42 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Remember - Allah is an ancient Arabian moon god, and Muhammed was a pedo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
I dunno, I doubt he’ll get the opportunity if a GOP Congress retains power - which, ironically, is much less likely to happen if Romney loses.

Kinda like when GWB had a Republican House and Senate and they stood firm against everything he did that was non-conservative?

Oh wait...

The only thing they really stood against was Amnesty.

All of his spending, his outlandish increase in the size of Medicare, everything else they just rubber-stamped.
69 posted on 09/17/2012 9:07:15 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
He was speaking at an event with like minded Americans. He was getting his message out and there's a small chance parts of it may get picked up by MSM.

Where would you suggest he speak? To the Chicago strikers? An OWS group?

70 posted on 09/17/2012 9:12:59 AM PDT by Jane Long (Soli Deo Gloria!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Okay, so let’s think about this, for a minute.

You stated a concern about abortion. Do you recall a GOP-controlled Congress advancing an abortion agenda by sending pro-abortion bills to Bush’s desk?

Neither do I.

So, concerning the stated concern you expressed, that settles that issue.

Now, for the other concerns you mentioned when you moved the goalposts, well, so what? Obama certainly isn’t going to engage in fiscal austerity. Virgil Goode isn’t under any circumstances going to get elected to be able to do so. So that leaves Romney. And your example is a bit non-sequitur, since we’re living in different times. Bush was a big spender, in part, because nobody was paying attention to deficits, and he thought he could be one. He shouldn’t have, true, but he thought this way nevertheless. Nobody in the GOP, even the GOP-Ers, think that way anymore. Different decade, different scenario.


71 posted on 09/17/2012 9:42:15 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Remember - Allah is an ancient Arabian moon god, and Muhammed was a pedo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

“Each person needs to vote in accordance with his conscience and the conditions in his State. Nobody should mindlessly vote for Romney, especially considering the contempt with which he has treated conservatives.”

Who’s advocating mindlessly voting for Romney? As I alluded to earlier, Romney is the lesser of the two evils. Yes, evil, as are most all politicians, but if the choice is between two evils, I’ll take the lesser of the two.

Romney’s contempt of conservatives doesn’t compare to Zero’s, which is basically anti-American. You’re promoting the non- and un-American Zero by either not voting for Romney or by not voting at all. To paraphrase:

“All that is necessary for (the larger of) evil to prevail, is for good men to do nothing”.


72 posted on 09/19/2012 10:59:02 AM PDT by Unc1e_Ivan ("People sleep peaceably at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Unc1e_Ivan
You’re promoting the non- and un-American Zero by either not voting for Romney or by not voting at all.

False dichotomy rejected.

IF they lose, the GOP-e and Karl Rove failed in their politics -- I did not.

73 posted on 09/19/2012 11:12:42 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

“IF they lose, the GOP-e and Karl Rove failed in their politics — I did not.”

If there’s a false dichotomy here, you just said it. Can you not see that we have to work with the GOP that we have and not the GOP that we’d like to have? Unless of course, you’re an Obamabot and really want the only party where conservatives have (barely) any voice at all NOT to win...

Thanks for throwing away your vote and for bringing us all down to a Brave New World with Zero’s reelection. /s


74 posted on 09/19/2012 12:04:50 PM PDT by Unc1e_Ivan ("People sleep peaceably at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Unc1e_Ivan
Can you not see that we have to work with the GOP that we have and not the GOP that we’d like to have?

I can see very clearly that "we" do NOT have "the GOP that we have" -- Karl Rove and the Business Roundtable and the RNC have a party. We have no party.

We are perforce independents, because the GOP-e will not let us play -- I speak as a Texas voter whose primary was delayed by cunning pleaders with suitcases full of applications for writs, bulging with motions -- who engineered the delay of the Texas primary beyond any date at which its outcome could influence the GOP nomination fight.

I see that very clearly.

You got anything else, Short Stuff?

And save your sanctimonious sarc for someone who cares.

75 posted on 09/19/2012 12:25:08 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

Ohhhh. Texas. That explains it. I’m a Virginia Tea Party’er myself.

So, you’re a Paul-bot or Rick Perry fan, then? I would have preferred Perry to Romney, though I think Paul’s foreign policy has its head in the sand.

I’m not a big fan of the GOP, but my argument still stands - by not voting, or by voting for a third candidate, you’re giving a vote to Obama.

Please, for the love of God and Country, reconsider your position! We can’t afford an un-American anti-American like Zero to win, even if it means voting for the (still evil) lesser of two evils like Romney. At least with Romney, our way of life isn’t in peril!

FYI, and if applicable, the Cowboys are my second favorite team - my favorite is whoever’s playin’ ‘em!


76 posted on 09/19/2012 1:28:36 PM PDT by Unc1e_Ivan ("People sleep peaceably at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
Obama’s 2nd term will shift the policies so far left, and embed Obamacare and Obama’s regulatory statism and social policiy liberalism so far in, it will be the end of conservatism as we know it.

Yes -- and that will be true if Romney wins, too.

You can smell the stink of homoaccommodation on him, the stink of the Open Borders Lobby and its greedy multibillionaires lusting to break American wages -- but not American prices!! -- to Calcutta levels with floods of impoverished, desperate immigrants who'll be given Motor Voter cards and driven to the polls by the 'Rat Machine.

You can smell the stink of the regulatory accommodator and Fair Tax conspirators, of the New World Order mandarins, and of a future America that bends in the winds of international despotic politics like a willow-tree in a high wind, shedding the rights of the People and their God-given freedom and their battlefield-won independence like so many leaves and twigs.

Romney/Rove is a huge setback for conservatives, and Turd Blossom's wheeling and dealing will make him, like Martin Van Buren, one of the most hated men in American history.

You can't wash Rove's stink off this election, and you can't drown out, with fair oratory, the clangor of the billionares' money changing hands behind the curtain as they buy whatever they want from the Empresario Rove.

Paul Ryan is a good man, but he's window dressing, a sop to the chumps thrown artfully by Turd Blossom.

It is highly significant that Ryan, not Romney, came to speak to the social conservatives. It almost exactly mirrors the same Rovian smooth move in 2000, when Turd Blossom held hands with the faithful of Ralph Reed's Christian coalition .... Ralph Reed being tied up cleverly by Turd Blossom's pal and errand boy,"Kenny Boy" Lay, with a big lobbying assignment for the Enron conglomerate .... and while the Christian Coalition ate box lunch and listened to Rove lying to them, the candidate himself, George W. Bush, was out to dinner with his advance woman Mary Matalin, making nice with the Log Cabin Republicans and assuring them that single-sex marriage (so-called) was a done deal, and that any opposition to it was (her word) "unfair".

This is rissoles -- rissoles of old box lunches for the conservatives, while the candidate lies down for his real masters.

Again Turd Blossom and his boy insult us -- and you say, unembarrassed, that we must vote for Turd Blossom's boy in November, or else. Or else WHAT ? What will the Great Catamite lie down for, that Romney, Rove's rent-boy, has not already?

77 posted on 09/19/2012 5:08:26 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Unc1e_Ivan
I’m not a big fan of the GOP, but my argument still stands - by not voting, or by voting for a third candidate, you’re giving a vote to Obama.

No, it doesn't, because it categorically fails as an argument. It is an appeal to motive in lieu of argument, and so therefore not an argument, but only an appeal.

And again, no, my vote does not "count for" Obama unless the election judge counts it and sees that yes, I have voted for Obama. Which I will never do.

We're done here.

78 posted on 09/19/2012 5:16:53 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

I dont disagree that Romney is not good for the conservative wing of the GOP. Romney is another GHWBush IMHO... but you know what? The GOP survived GHWB and so did America.

There is a huge difference between a RINO and a commited leftist like Obama. Obama is locking in a permanent Democrat majority through legions of govt dependents and clients to his panders. And I am warming up to some of what ROmney is saying, as he actually seems to see that as well:

“Frankly, we have two different views about America. The president’s view is one of a larger government. There is a tape that came out today where is the president is saying he likes redistribution. I disagree. I think a society based upon a government-centered nation, where government plays a larger and larger role, redistributes money, that’s the wrong course for America. That will not build a strong America or help people out of poverty. … No, I’m talking about a perspective of individuals who I’m not likely to get to support me. I recognize that those people who are not paying income tax are going to say, ‘Gosh, this provision that Mitt keeps talking about lowering income taxes,’ that’s not going to be attractive to them. And those that are dependent on government and those that think government’s job is redistribute — I’m not going to get them.” - Mitt Romney

“I know I’m not going to get 100 percent of the vote, And my campaign will focus on those people we think we can bring in to support me,” he said. “But this is a campaign about helping people who need help, and right now the people who are poor in this country need help getting out of poverty, the people in the middle-class need help because their incomes have gone down every year for the last four years.” - Mitt ROmney


79 posted on 09/19/2012 10:07:14 PM PDT by WOSG (REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMA. He stole America’s promise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
There is a huge difference between a RINO and a commited leftist like Obama.

Problem is, if you're a GOP senator, what do you do when the GOP President, the leader of your Party, sends the Secretary of the Navy around to lobby you -- or lobbies you himself -- to ratify LOST or the ICC or any of these other NWO-building, sovereignty-abrogating, unequal treaties?

Obama you fight tooth and nail and spear his SCOTUS nominees through the heart; but what do you do when POTUS sends you another Souter or Stevens?

80 posted on 09/19/2012 10:47:32 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
My larger point is, with majorities in Congress, we are not helpless before Obama; and therefore, we are not necessarily prostrate before Karl Rove, the GOP-e, and their magickal mannequin.
81 posted on 09/19/2012 10:49:28 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

Yes, the argument does still stand, because it is the categorical definition of an argument - trying to persuade someone (YOU) with reasons (NOT VOTING ROMNEY) to accept a certain conclusion (WILL ENSURE A ZERO WIN). Seems simple enough.

You mistake my emotional appeal for you to change your course of action as a philosophical appeal to your logical motive, which, semantically speaking, is an entirely different thing.

And try not to miss the forest for the trees here... I said you’re “giving” your vote to Obama, not voting for him literally, i.e. if you sit at home or vote third-party candidate, Obama-voters will have no need to negate your nonexistent Romney vote for a Zero win. So, you’ll have in effect aided and abetted in a Democrat victory.

Okay, now we’re done here.


82 posted on 09/19/2012 11:48:21 PM PDT by Unc1e_Ivan (People sleep peaceably at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Unc1e_Ivan
So, you’ll have in effect aided and abetted in a Democrat victory.

With language like that, you've come dangerously close to wilfully mischaracterizing a free exercise of the franchise as a criminal activity.

That said, a false dichotomy is always a spurious appeal, a fallacy -- and therefore, not an argument, but appeal to motive rather than logic. Accusing people of criminality into the bargain shows how far over the line you are.

NOW we're done.

83 posted on 09/20/2012 12:42:36 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

There’s no false dichotomy here, unless viewed through spoiled brat lenses: I can’t get what I want (a true conservative prez), so I’ll ruin it for everybody else (and campaign against the least leftist of the two viable candidates).

That, my friend, is aiding and abetting in a Democrat victory.

And don’t hide behind “the franchise”. What, are you an employee of the ACLU all of a sudden?

Again, thanks for helping Zero win re-election. It was a nice 236 years.

NOW WE’RE ALL ALMOST DONE FOR, thanks to a few who should have known better.


84 posted on 09/26/2012 12:25:23 PM PDT by Unc1e_Ivan (People sleep peaceably at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson