Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Noob1999
You've come up with a lot of excuses for Romney's liberalism, so let's play your game for a moment. He was only liberal because he was in charge of Massachusetts, least that's the claim. So explain how we're to expect that he'll suddenly become conservative and challenge the liberals who presently hold both houses of congress?

How will he restrain that ‘need to be loved’ bent that supposedly explains all his moments of weakness?

Just because the guy in the Oval Office has a R after his name doesn't make it any more comfortable as government is expanded further and further in this glorified crusade to find ‘bipartisanship’, which is just liberal code for ‘do what we want, or we'll whine louder.’

Romney is either, as you claim, a spineless wimp who will sell out every value he holds if faced with the slightest challenge, or he's as many on here claim, a liberal who wears a R after his name. Either way, in my dictionary, that's the definition of LOSER.

The ONLY way that conservatives will again win the White House is to present an actual alternative. Liberal Lite won't cut it, why accept a simulation when you could just have the real thing? Do I think Palin’s the alternative? Get back to me when hers isn't a virtually lone voice in the wilderness, because so long as she continues to voice the conservative viewpoint, and get that message out, she can count on my support.

And Romney can count on my fiercest opposition. Not that there's a lack of worse characters out there, but because he takes these stands and claims to represent my viewpoints, which he most certainly does not.

148 posted on 11/27/2009 9:56:43 PM PST by kingu (Party for rent - conservative opinions not required.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: kingu

And Romney can count on my fiercest opposition.”

There’s that negativity I posted about, seems it would be more productive to vigorously support the candidate of your choice.


162 posted on 11/27/2009 10:10:36 PM PST by Peter Horry (Those who aren't responsible always know best.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies ]

To: kingu

................Either way, in my dictionary, that’s the definition of LOSER.........................

In my dictionary, a LOSER is one who cannot beat the current Socialist/Communist in Charge, ZER0.

I’m not really persuaded as to one’s politics, abortion, gun rights, or any other issue, other than getting this total A-Hole out of office.

At this stage - three years into the future, please don’t write off anyone that can ignite more than 50% of the electorate.

Just get this disaster out of office.

Now, If the freaks in SF can dump Pelosi; the beautiful folks in LA dump PigNose Waxman; kick Reid out of the casino in 2010; get rid of Dodd and Bwarney; then I’ll take a different stance looking into 2012 - after 2010.

But, right now, every pubbie, keep their powder dry!


171 posted on 11/27/2009 10:25:02 PM PST by Noob1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson