Posted on 11/07/2012 9:40:48 PM PST by Kevmo
"He [Romney] killed us all over the country. Look at [same-sex] marriage. We've never lost the issue before, until it shared a ballot with Romney then we lost it four times on one day. Heck, we even won marriage in California on Election Day 2008 for goodness sake.
There will never be another establishment candidate like that. Jeb Bush, Chris Christie...those people will never happen. Heck, I think Christie will be driven out of the GOP and be the next Charlie Crist. Mitt just killed Republicans in my home state. People are angry, especially because Matt Drudge and Karl Rove told us it was all in the bag all along, after they got done smearing conservatives in the primary and dumping on Todd Akin.
It's on like Donkey Kong."
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/deace-gop-romney-obama-2012-11#ixzz2Bben4Km6
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Romney legitimately got second place at the Iowa Caucuses. However, there were several conservatives who created an opening for Romney to perform so well.
That is called lying, I read your post when I first saw it yesterday, before responding, you really are dedicated to this childish posting.
Play grown-up for a minute, and tell me something political that you disagree with me about on this thread.
Is this related to Catholics being a devoted democrat voting block?
Is it about Romney being a lefty loser?
Am I too supportive of social conservatives for you?
My issue with you is that you seem to think that socon issues trump fiscon issues, and they do not.
***Yes I do.
I am pro-winning.
***So am I. When there’s a socon, he wins. When it’s a moderate or fiscon/anti-socon, he loses.
My issue with socons, if I have one at all, is that pushing socon issues ahead of fiscon issues means that we can’t get anywhere on either front.
***You like to win. Support the Socon. From my home page:
___________________________________________________________________
I’m a big tent republican.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1821435/posts?page=18455
Here’s an analogy to work with. Take a small box and fill it with some rocks. Then add some rice, filling it to the top. Now take all the same stuff, but in a different order. Put in the rice first, then add the rocks. What you’ll find is that if you put in the big stuff first, the small stuff will fit around it. But if you put in the small stuff first, the big stuff won’t have room. The republican tent is the box. The Big issues are the socon issues, to be put in first. The little issues are things that can be accommodated around the bigger stuff. A candidate who tries to focus on the smaller issues first and leave out the bigger issues has no way of getting all of us into the tent. He splits the party. The candidate who gets the big stuff right and as much of the little stuff that will fit, he can fit more into the tent. We’re often amazed at how much rice can keep fitting in. Folks such as Rudy or Romney flunk some of the big issues, and on some of the little issues it looks to me like anyone else’s rice would do just as well. All that remains for us to agree on is which are the bedrock principles and which are not. Why would there be so much invective aimed at rudy or romney from the right? Because there are some bedrock principles that he is leaving out. Bad move. I see rudybot and romneybot postings all the time saying that they would vote for Hunter or Palin, and I see socon postings that say they would not vote for rudy or romney. That’s a BIG indicator of a few bedrock principles that are being left outside the tent in order to let in some rice.
___________________________________________________________________
You got that right—this man is a KOOK!!! These people believe his opinion as value and to him, it does. Deace must love headlines like this one.
Kevmo:
Then why did you continue with the track you were on, the one where you supposedly “misread” the original paragraph.
Ansel:
That is called lying,
***I agree, what you did is called lying.
You can’t win anything if you are dead. I think that we cannot influence policy unless we can win. And there is no way to win on socon issues if as a nation we are being killed at the hands of the statists. I’m here trying to preserve our Republic for my kids and grandkids.
***You honestly think we’re getting killed? You say it twice, as if to emphasize, and there is no hint of sarcasm.
What are YOU doing here?
***Defending conservatism. You’re mad at people who didn’t vote for a guy whom you admit is neither socon nor fiscon. That makes you a good republican, not a conservative. FR is not a republican website, it is a conservative website.
Why don’t YOU get a clue. I was QUOTING that phrase from another poster.
And please, do NOT refer to me as “anti-Christian”. Such a remark is not only offensive and ignorant it is wrong.
I could not have made the point better. Precisely.
You would rather have an avowed marxist, a red diaper baby, an Islamist sympathizer, a man with no honest affinity for the traditions and the heritage of our nation and its founding principles than a man who, with all his faults, and they are legion, is at least not an anti-American, and with whom we could at least have the possibility of beginning the process of Constitutional restoration. As it is now, we are well into the shiggy. Thanks in large part to otherwise good people who couldn't manage to vote for a Mormon. Talk about making the perfect the enemy of the good!
I have no idea what you are trying to say, I read your original posts, and responded to your posts to me, there was no lying involved, except for your recent posts.
How thin skinned are you that you are totally obsessed with something, but I still don’t know what.
You won’t respond with any politics, only some kind of hurt feelings about something.
Give me something to work with, all your posts are about some internal feelings that you have, anger, lashing out, personal feelings, do you or do you not have any political disagreement with any of my posts?
To: John Valentine
It appears to have been the loonie holier-than-thou moralists who were willing to throw the entire nation under the bus to protect their holy purity.
Who specifically, the very tiny number of the anti-Christians who vote republican?
The Evangelicals who voted 79% for Romney?
The Catholics who only voted 48% for Romney?
The social liberals who only vote by tiny numbers for republicans?
Who?
33 posted on Wed Nov 07 2012 22:38:53 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by ansel12
LOL, get over yourself you cretin. I’m not the enemy here and move your stupidity towards obama, not me.
I could not have made the point better. Precisely. You would rather have
***I would rather have a conservative. This is a conservative website. Berating conservatives because they didn’t vote for a librul is not conservative. It says right in the founder’s statement that we are not beholden to ANY political party; FR is not a GOP website. So stop with the bowlsheet of conservatives preferring something over another when they had no real choice. The GOP let them down. Would you expect blacks to vote for a kkk candidate? Would you go onto blackpower.com and berate them for not voting for someone antithetical to their principles? No, because such a thing is OBVIOUSLY trolling. But coming onto a conservative website and berating conservatives for not voting for their antithetical nonconservative is somehow acceptable. Bowlsheet. It’s trolling.
I see you’re still accusing me of lying. Looks like you’re the one who’s thin-skinned, continuing to make it personal.
thanks for bumping the thread
T4BTT
When someone tells you that they read your post, and you keep saying that they didn’t, even after having been corrected on that fact, then it is called lying.
What is weirder is your rage and refusal to respond to me with anything related to the political discussion or anything specific, even about that post about the “big tent”, instead it is pure, personal venting of something that only you know about, some profound inner hurt.
Thanks for bumping the thread
T4BTT
I wish that I could see inside your head.
Evidently you agree with every single one of my political posts on the thread, which you should of course.
I’m glad that you like me bumping the thread.
T4BTT
It’s why so many good, talented, and accomplished people don’t want to run for office, precisely because they don’t want to be (or their families) subjected to gross slander.
***One of the things the GOP is supposed to do for its candidates, but only does selectively for the more liberal ones. If anything, the rumor about Palin was that some bigwig GOPers told her they would pull out all the stops and finish what they started against her in 2008.
Man oh man oh man. I am sick of the intellectual dishonesty on display here on this thread.
You, ansel12, top of the list. Here’s my quote, you throw at me: “It appears to have been the loonie holier-than-thou moralists who were willing to throw the entire nation under the bus to protect their holy purity.”
Where, oh where in there are any anti-Christian words? Or do you think “loonie holier-than-thou moralists” equates to “Christians”. That’s YOU, man, not me.
Sure, this applies to some Christians - I don’t deny that, but your tar brush is entirely too broad, and it does not apply to me.
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.