Posted on 12/25/2007 9:24:16 PM PST by tj21807
What a great summary.
Immigration leftists like Obama, Ted Kennedy, and McCain want to end the United States in favor of their dreamed-of merged USAMexico.
The way McRino wants legislation and policies, it seems he and the swimmer are joined at the hip sometimes.
Agreed; good post.
Nice to see a conservative newspaper rip Romney to shreds and expose him for the phony he is.
The National Review, hardly a liberal or RINO publication, has endorsed Romney.
The fact is, apart from those that are unelectable (Hunter, Tancredo), there aren’t any good choices for conservatives among the Pubs, so, once again, it comes down to the lesser of two evils. The fact that some are embracing McCain (McCain!!!!!) as the conservative alternative speaks volumes about the state of the party and the country.
NH is not liberal, they are well aware of the threat of Romney, having seen him wreak havoc south of their border.
Nice...
Could’nt put it any better.
Of course, a logical conclusion to the choice laid out for us is a great big “none of the above”.
McLame is even more of a sell-out. I won't dupport him in the primaries. He's no conservative. McCain-Feingold, anyone? That law has damaged free speech. Mitt is not that great either, I'm not a big fan, but at least he didn't write a law that in wholly unconstitutional and damaging to the country.
I just don’t see any enthusiasm for wanting to be President and lead our Country.
Maybe that is just his style, but the oldness factor, IMO, isn’t his appearance.
“THERE IS A reason Mitt Romney has not received a single newspaper endorsement in New Hampshire.”
That’s the best argument I’ve heard in months that Romney really is a conservative. The more hated he is, including by the Union-Leader, the better.
I would take Romney over McCain or Rudy anyday. And Huckabee. I would vote Thompson or Hunter first.
Further to the Concord Monitor back and forth, here’s a less liberal paper against Romney.
They seem to have Slick Willard figured out pretty accurately.
Damn good read here.
Reagan should have had the nomination in 1976. I was a college freshman, working two jobs and going to college. His nightly radio show (before he declared) spoke to a lot of us. Those of us who liked him worked harder, organized better and gently persuaded a lot of skeptics that he wasn't too old even back then.
I was honored to be the youth speaker for him at our county convention. 80% of the rank and file were behind us. The party bosses, however, decided it wouldn't be right to throw a sitting president overboard and split the delegation 50-50.
Reagan begin working on his 1980 campaign the day after Jimmy Carter was elected, if not before. He never saw the nomination as an entitlement to a respected elder statesman. He never saw the presidency as a power trip for his personal ego. That is why those of us who lived through that era and supported him still use RWR as the gold standard under which all other candidates are measured.
McCain also gets a lot of help from Huckabee and Guilani on this front.
Which, in a nutshell, it why Mitt has now moved up to my third choice.
Thank you for your reply.
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.