Posted on 03/02/2012 11:34:11 AM PST by libertarian neocon
The only thing that matters is what conservatives want.
Don’t leave out the enviromentalists. They love him for his strong support for the endangered species act and the fight against global warming.
‘The only thing that matters is what conservatives want.”
Conservatives should want Newt, the only Reagan conservative in the race.
Santorum is just not ready for prime time. He is simply too divisive, offending gays,
Any politician that is willing to offend sodomites gets at least a second look from me.
Don’t leave out the potential lunar colonists too.
What are you smokin’? Rasmussen shows Santorum trailing Obama by two points, Romney by six, and Gingrich out of sight in the rear-view mirror.
Wow brilliant post, good job my FRriend. These gullable casual republicans that aren’t as informed as us conservatives are going to doom us all. I pray Newt gets back up in the polls, it will be so exciting seeing him go against obama. GO NEWT!!
Conservatives do want Newt, your effort to make him seem more liberal won’t stop that.
You implied that Newt is not as conservative as Santorum in some important ways.
I hope that Newt is more socially conservative than Santorum and more effective at it, that is what I am counting on.
Sorry, the first line is from the article. I just haven’t figured out how to italicise..
Look, I agree with you, but if the polls are to be believed (and I haven’t seen any reason why they shouldn’t) Santorum is holding on to enough support to beat Gingrich everywhere but Georgia.
Santorum may be on the way down, but unless his slide accelerates, he won’t be low enough by Tuesday. Like I said, I am a huge Newt supporter, but I’m trying to be realistic.
I will happily listen to reasons I am wrong.
“Conservatives do want Newt, your effort to make him seem more liberal won’t stop that.”
I wasnt trying to make Newt out to be more liberal. I just think he basically agrees with this quote from Reagan:
“If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.”
“Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.”
Newt is socially conservative. But there is a big difference between opposing abortion and lecturing about the dangers of contraception.
“Any politician that is willing to offend sodomites gets at least a second look from me.”
If it were just gays, I dont think it would be a problem. But he has offended parents, women, protestants and libertarians.
He wants us to unite behind Newt, when failing to unite behind Santorum cost us MI.
This is completely backwards. Arguing we should unite behind Newt will guarantee a Romney landslide.
Perhaps that’s the goal?
How is providing contraception a legitimate function of the federal government?
How is forcing private employers to provide contraceptive coverage a legitimate application of the constitution? Don’t libertarians believe that the constitution protects the free exercise of religion?
How is forcing anyone to buy anything a legitimate function of the federal government? Is contraception your only concern?
I am sick and tired of “compassionate” soft spoken so called conservatives. This country cannot survive another one. I want the meanest SOB that can be found, that is not afriad of what will be said about him/her, and will take the fight to the enemy(communists).... this small l libertarian backs newt....
He’s more offensive to protestants than Newt getting his first two marriages anulled because they were protestant?
If libertarians wish to unite with conservatives behind a candidate who is conservative socially and militarily as well as fiscally then I am for that.
Social issues are non-negotiable however, and will not be on the back burner.
“How is providing contraception a legitimate function of the federal government?”
“How is forcing private employers to provide contraceptive coverage a legitimate application of the constitution? Don’t libertarians believe that the constitution protects the free exercise of religion?”
I wasn’t slamming Santorum’s attack on Obama’s contraception plan, but his statement that he would use the Presidency to combat contraception in general (including purely private use). He basically took an issue we all could agree on, people shouldnt have to pay for other peoples contraception, especially if it violates religious doctrine, into something that pitted social conservatives against everyone else.
Notice how quickly the narrative turned from Obama being oppressive to Santorum trying to turn back the clock.
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.