........Right now I am much more concerned about 2010 than 2012................
That’s very true!
But we have to keep a focus on 2012.
Zer0 on the one side:
Who’s to beat him on the other side?
Time to keep the powder dry, for anyone qualified and wiling to have reloaded and step up to the front line to kill the enemy.
We don’t know whether that’s Mitt, Palin, Huckabee, or anybody else, but why does FR go to such unrelented lengths to trash Romney at this stage of the fight.
I’m taking flak tonight, I hope I take more, because I want a real impartial debate to take place amongst our pubbie 50% of the population, without trashing either of the possible contenders!
You should address #120. That post brings up an interesting point.
So if _bama(pbuh) switched parties and said “Reagan” a bunch of times, you would have no problem with him?
Telling the truth about Romney, often from his own words, is not trashing him. For all of his negatives, there are very few positives. And some views, without a great deal of clarification/explanation/repudiation from Romney himself, render him an unacceptable candidate.
Just one example from the video linked to this page (it sounds like everyone has the same video under the story):
I am not going to change our pro-choice laws in Massachusetts in any way. I will preserve them, I will protect them, I will enforce them, and therefore I am not going to make any law that would make it any more difficult for a woman to make that choice herself.
This is not a conservative position. Nor is RomneyCare.
Maybe there is some sort of change that has taken place since 2002, but that means we need to discuss those changes in Romney's position, with evidence at least as convincing as these that show his unacceptable (earlier) views.
without trashing either of the possible contenders!
There are only going to be two? I would hope this was simply a misstatement on your part.