Posted on 02/04/2016 4:50:36 AM PST by Enlightened1
And, you’re willing to accept that difficult choice - most certain, instead of trying to forestall it. Nice tactic. NOT
http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Marco_Rubio_Immigration.htm
http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Marco_Rubio_Gun_Control.htm
http://www.ontheissues.org/Economic/Marco_Rubio_Welfare_+_Poverty.htm
Not my first choice, but hardly the second coming of Obama. And that last sentence in your post sounds pathetic.
Romney was the last straw for me. I am not voting for another Romney, and Rubio is a Romney.
They promise the world to get the nomination and then fold like a cheap suit at the first sign of kickback from the media or Democrats. Those dogs just won’t fight.
After graciously conceding defeat I thought he might in fact have learned a lesson. The next day he went back to the tried and not so true and is actually responding to Cruz’s baiting instead of the reverse. Losing is one thing. But defeat has value if you take lessons from it and improve. As of Monday night I was for the very first time (have never bought into his business “genius” image ... give me Jack Welch any day) impressed with Trump. That lasted about twelve hours.
I'll tell you about Reagan. He compromised when that was necessary to progress the mission. He quite often infuriated armchair conservatives too. You might have lived through his time but you learnt very little from his example.
Trump needs a much better week next week or he’s finished IMHO.
Rubio is a lot of things but if you're going to accuse him of being a male escort, you'd better have some evidence. "There are possible rumors on the web" doesn't cut it.
Grow up. Male escorts don't become senators.
I was here the whole time after I returned from 7 straight years overseas in the military. Don’t tell me about learning.
It's disappointing. It's not working. He gets emotional (and that's not always a bad thing.)
But who knows? Change is possible. Carl Icahn or someone he respects might put him straight. What gets me riled is the gotcha exaltation of Freepers who can't wait to be theatrically disappointed, at a candidate's misstep.
No. Rubio is just a stalking horse for the Democrats. He is not, so far as is known, a Moslem.
” As an anchor baby, he is also ineligible to be president under the natural born clause. “
Do you even know the definition of an anchor baby?
Not like I support or even like the hyena roobio, but just can’t stand the lies.
Rubio may be the Nominee, but he will not win the election. I still suspect that Bush will be the nominee or at least that the RNC has assured him that if he just stays in the race and patiently endures the humiliation of it he will be nominated at the convention as it is his turn. If the RNC allows Bush to not be nominated it will upset their traditions mightily.
You're right. The name calling on both sides has to stop. They're clearing the way for Rubio and the latest polls show it. I wish Trump would close his Twitter account.
I can’t disagree with what you wrote and was just describing, not advocating an “11th Commandment”, which as I mentioned was mythical anyway. You can look back at the 1952 campaign of Taft vs. Eisenhower or Goldwater vs. Rockefeller in 1964 to see examples of really hard fought primaries and bitter conventions. Taking out the Vichy Republicans in this part of the process is necessary and it’s being done by a thoroughly disgusted voter base. But that fight can be won on policy not personal attack leaving a united party to beat the real enemy in the Fall.
Not a problem...I was really thinking about someone else’s responses here and hoped he was still lurking.
My first point is that we are not in the life-or-death contest of a general election. We are in primary season and there is no justification whatsoever that we all have to defend EVERY so-called Republican candidate according to that “11th Commandment”.
The simple fact is that I believe we have ideological traitors in our midst (in my book Bush, Kasich and Rubio with his amnesty). I will not accept this second-most-evil theorem at this point. As far as I’m concerned, those arguing it at this point, especially on behalf of Jeb or Kasich aren’t conservative in any way. They are quibblers, quislings and equivocators who don’t want us to have a real choice that might actually result in something not ‘Democrat’.
The Obama precedent is now irreversible short of a Supreme Court decision which will not come. His father was not a citizen and his place of birth is questionable, at least.
“Do you even know the definition of an anchor baby?”
An anchor baby is a baby that is born in the United States of parents who are not citizens.
Rubio was born in the United States of parents who were not ciizens.
Where is the lie?
Rubio is almost like John Boehner on policy and legislation too minus the alcohol.
So if you like the way John Boehner worked with Democrats, then you will love Rubio.
Both are 100% certified Establishment/Globalist sell out rats.
“An anchor baby is a baby that is born in the United States of parents who are not citizens.”
A lie. The “anchor” comes from using the baby to gain permanent residency and/or citizenship. In Roobio’s parents case, they were Legal residents that didn’t require an anchor baby to gain residency. There was no anchoring.
By your deceitful definition, all first generation born children of immigrants are “anchor” babies. Liar.
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.