[dps.inspect]

OK... here is the proposition: Newt appears to understand that, though Romney is a "flawed" candidate, he can do more to help correct America's course with a Romney Presidency than he can under another four years of Obama. My premiss is that Newt's mentality IS Rational Conservatism, and we all will be better off fighting a Romney to correct the ship of state than we would be fighting Obama.

The Question is; can you adapt? That doe's not mean caving on your principles, but perhaps prioritizing your principles. So, just what is the governing principle? Freedom and Freedom of Conscience, the highest of all our God given inalienable rights. Obama is not just a liberal, he's a Marxist who believes you should not have the choices you have, that you cannot be trusted with your inalienable rights. Is not his battle with the Catholic Church regarding contraception evidence of what his ultimate goal is? He condemns our freedom of conscience if it does not line up with his statist views. Statists do not have a problem doing away with those that inhibit their ambition, and a population with a free moral conscience is the greatest threat to the state.

While Romney is a liberal, I believe he can be dissuaded of his liberal bent to some degree or another. Obama will not be dissuaded of his Marxist march... It couldn't be more black and white folks, the choice between Romney and Obama... I think Newt understands full well and is rational about his choices.

[Longbow1969]

Romney the chameleon is not a conservative and an unimpressive candidate, but Hussein the dog eater is far worse. A vote for Willard is the only ballot one can cast that has any chance of being instrumental in removing Obama, therefore that is what I will do. Elections are as much about defeating the opposition as furthering your own cause, and Obama is the worst President in modern history (yes, even worse than Carter) and must be defeated to prevent our complete slide into a failed European socialist state.

[Mr. K]

It all depends on who he picks for VP. I did not vote for McLame last time- I voted for Palin.

I would love to see Romney pick GINGRICH

so we can hear Gingrich bad-mouth Obama until november

[JRandomFreeper]

I don't vote for liberals. I campaign against them.

/johnny

[Responsibility2nd]

What the ABO crowd does not understand is that with a choice of Mitt or Obama as prez; we conservatives really don’t care which of those losers is the winner.

I repeat. We do not care if Mitt or Obama wins. Because if this is the case... Conservatives lose. The best we can hope for is real conservatives to be elected in the House and Senate.

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


Trying not to "spam" posts here ...

However, as I've written earlier ...

"Who the HELL ... "is" ... Mitt Romney" ?

"What" (besides enjoying firing people and wearing ceremonial "magic" Mormon underwear") ...

does Mitt O-Romney REALLY believe ?



The frightening scenario of a Romney Presidency is that he can endorse-pursue ANY POLICY from ANY DIRECTION ...

and still say that "I've held this position before" ...



How can America's conservatives be so ABSOLUTELY STUPID ???

Rush Limbaugh likes to joke that "Blacks are STRUCK on the Democratic Plantation" ...

How do we (conservatives) feel today ?

as the GOP E-RINO club laughs at us ... we their SLAVES ... on the Juan McCain -- Linday Graham Plantation ?




I feel like I want to puke with the terrible news over the past few days ...



.

[kevcol]

While Romney is a liberal, I believe he can be dissuaded of his liberal bent to some degree or another. Obama will not be dissuaded of his Marxist march... It couldn't be more black and white folks

Disagree. Personally, I don't follow any pol - I follow my own convictions. I don't need a pol to show me the light or sugarcoat socialism.

A) A Marxist, abortionist, homo-agenda-coddling, big government, open borders, socialized medicine, who doesn't give a s*** about our country or the Constitution as president + a Congress mostly resisting his agenda, and a chance for a true Conservative/Constitution-abiding president in 2016...

or


B) A Marxist, abortionist, homo-agenda-coddling, big government, open borders, socialized medicine, who doesn't give a s*** about our country or the Constitution as president + a Congress mostly enabling his agenda, and no chance for a true Conservative/Constitution-abiding president in your lifetime.

[pollywog]

I agree.

[Logical me]

If we get the Senate and hold the House, Romney will never be King like King Obama has been. Been listening to some of Romney latest speeches and some of them contain what Newt has been saying. We can only hope that Romney will follow through with at least some of what he says and keep the liberal crap down. Maybe the Senate and House will hold his nose to the grindstone. I have to go Romney now unless something at the convention changes things.

[entropy12]

We already know how Obama 2nd term will be. Anyone recall what he whispered to Medvedev on a hot mike?

Obama is lazy, narcissistic, socialist, big government promoter, clueless on how to grow economy, apologizer in chief to foreiners, wastes time playing golf (100 rounds so far) when country is facing serious problems, Solyndra, Arizona immigration, Fast & Furious, against Keystone & domestic energy production, anti-Israel, pro-Muslim, America divider, in the pocket of unions and trial lawyers, and wastes tax payer money by endless vacations on Air Force One and weekly parties at the White House.

Romney was at bottom on my list, but at this point I have little choice except ABO.

[Mashood]

Newt will make a wonderful “Reducing Government” czar in the Romney administration.

[EternalVigilance]

[Zionist Conspirator]

This has been the most disappointing Republican primary season in history. I am thoroughly depressed over the whole thing and praying for a miracle to occur at the convention this summer.

[Finny]

Newt's a great candidate, I'd vote for him happily given the chance, but he's been on the wrong side a few times in his career -- his endorsement of Scozzafava (who later endorsed the Democrat) comes to mind.

This is another "Scozzafava moment" for Newt.

Voting for socialist Romney is as nuts as voting for socialist Obama. I have a duty to vote, and as a conservative who understands liberalism/statism for the threat to freedom that it is, I have a duty to vote to reject liberalism. If the General is O vs R, I'm voting third party for the express purpose of using my vote to help make whatever socialist wins, Obama or Romney, enter office with the smallest plurality possible and therefore embattled and weakened by the fact that the majority voted against him. When Clinton won with only 43 percent, he got his ass kicked in the mid-terms. So I'll use my vote to try to make the victor as weak and opposed as possible.