Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 10/17/2011 1:24:47 AM PDT by steveab
Just as a brand new book further exposes the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)(which scam I dissected here, and in more disturbing detail here), and on the heels of the weekend surprise of a 2005 memo showing President Obama’s cooling/warming/population zealot of a ‘science czar’ John Holdren is the kind of guy Mitt Romney turns to to develop his ‘environmental’ policies, we’ve exposed the Obama administration and IPCC have cooperated to subvert U.S. transparency laws, run domestically out of Holdren’s White House office.
Thanks steveab.
If, next November, it comes down to a choice between Obama and Romney, I will vote for Obama. Here is why...
If Romney wins, he will be in a position to implement the entire Obama agenda. Romney will be able to peel off moderate Republicans and reach across the aisle to Democrats to pass Cap & Trade, Amnesty, Nationalized Health Care (his “replacement), Stimulus III, and every other bad Obama idea to come down the pike. We will get Obama’s second term agenda, with one major difference...
If Obama wins, he will be dealing with a hostile Congress, with Republican majorities in both houses. He will be unable to attract Republican votes to any of this proposals, because every Republican now knows that voting with Barack Obama is political suicide. The entire Obama agenda will wither on the vine as the country spends four years locked in partisan gridlock.
Given the choice between Obama and Romney, partisan gridlock is our best option. So, given that choice, I will walk down to the voting booth, and with a clear conscience, cast my vote for Barack Hussein Obama.
The same DC crowd backing Obama...love Mitt...its more of the same...its a no lose situation for him to be the Republican nominee...
This effort has apparently been conducted with participation — thereby direct assistance and enabling — by the Obama White House which, shortly after taking office, seized for Holdren’s office the lead role on IPCC work from the Department of Commerce. The plan to secretly create a FOIA-free zone was then implemented.
This represents politically assisting the IPCC to enable UN, EU and U.S. bureaucrats and political appointees avoid official email channels for specific official work of high public interest, performed on official time and using government computers, away from the prying eyes of increasingly skeptical taxpayers.
Anyone from NY who remembers Pataki should understand your point: nobody passes a Leftist agenda faster than a RINO. Just having an (R) after the Executive’s name will gain automatic support of at least 10% of Republicans, regardless of what the bill in question is - often enough to pass pretty much anything the Democrats want.
I wouldn’t go so far as voting for the Obama instead of Romney, but would go 3rd party just to make the point.
Yes, there are awful things which would come of it. Point is, it’s a matter of the lesser of two evils, and methinks the greater evil is whoever can get more an evil agenda passed. RINOs seek and obtain cooperation and bill passage, when gridlock is preferable.
As opposed to 3 or 4 more David Souters?
You think Romney would look outside the Harvard Faculty Lounge for USSC?
Maybe the Senate Republicans would start to take their duties seriously once they have the majority, and they would refuse to confirm some of these losers.
The big problem with Romney is that he would break the gridlock, enabling the passage of the Democrat agenda. Romney would be 95% as bad as Obama, but he would get whatever he wants.
Give me Obama and gridlock, if that is my choice.
Oh, sure. THROW YOUR VOTE AWAY! < /KODOS>
Pataki in NY, Arnie in California, RINO’s do MORE damage to what conservatives stand for.
I voted 3rd party last election.
It’s not like McPain had a chance here in California.
I can’t say you’re wrong, though I could never actually vote for Obama.
But look how craven the GOP House and Senators are now as an opposition party. They’d go right along with the Democrats in voting in the Romney agenda, which of course is just a slightly slower version of Obamacare.
I’d see it as a likely third Nixon term.
(Also, a bigger version of a second term of Romney as MA guv, which was really ugly.)
*slower version of Obama’s agenda*
Where are you, Mitt fans. Answer the question.
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.