FOX: MITT WINS MICHIGAN

[Recovering_Democrat]

Brit Hume just called it.

[calvo]

No Conservative supports a sleazy, lying Massachusetts liberal asshat. None.

I am just wondering made you the arbitor of who is or is not a conservative? I have voted Republican all my life, went to the war when called, and have paid taxes for about 50 years. I don't know if that is enough to qualify as a conservative or not, but I like what I have seen from Mitt. In fact, I really didn't take a serious look at him until the dim-bulbs like you started making stupid comments about him. So I guess Mitt ought to write you a thank you note.

[restornu]

You have no clue what Michigan was like in the 40’s and 50’s it was pure American.

I remember the school system curriculum was build upon character building and the History of America and Judeo-Christian values.

Around 1953 the was the germination of the NEA as I look back instead of some teachers who were just malcontents they were really teachers who resented good being taught and angry at students who gravitated towards it!

Romney was a part of that system of Character building and our other tradition of History and religion values!

But just like the road rage folks who seems to always to be in a state of Cyber Rage, and while one is in a stage of rage they are temporary insane!

And when in the mode of insane one can not see clearly what is for real, only what the mind continues to perceives or reinforce!

[cowtowney]

“Ditto that, but I’m thinking Fred is the best and hope he can win in the end. But at least I won’t be gagging in Nov if Romney is on the ballot. McCain has totally worn me out between campaign finance, opposing tax cuts and amnesty for illegals — just way too many years in DC for that guy. He’s been sucked into the dark side, IMHO.”

I agree. I’m looking past Thompson at this point. It’s a three way race and I don’t want McCain at all. He’s by far the worst of the three. Hopefully, Rudy won’t raise his ugly liberal head again.

[restornu]

He actually won something contested for once. Congratulations.

Well Mitt had also won in Wyoming too but somehow the media ignored it!

As you see so far Mitt has 40 delegates!

[cowtowney]

“I’m SO glad McQuirky lost.May it continue.”

I agree. McCain drives me crazy. He says one thing and does another. He’s also got this angry old man syndrome going, that is very unattractive. Reminds me of Robert Byrd.

Mark Levin had two articles about him on his website.

I can’t understand why John Gibson was supporting McCain the other day.

[cowtowney]

“A class act? He’s bribed the electorate, he’s NEVER leveled with the American people, he cut off McCain’s concession speech (something no previous winner has done to him), he’s done a 180 on almost every single issue for no reason other than his complete lack of integrity. John McCain is 10 times the person Mitt Romney is.”

Welcome to FR.

I don’t mind if someone changed their mind as long as it was not more than once. I don’t care if Romney interrupted McCain’s bloviating. Maybe, he felt McCain was trying to turn a defeat into a victory on Romney’s time.

Finally, I’d rather have someone who changed his mind to the right policies rather than someone who is liberal like McCain and is too hard headed to change.

[DoughtyOne]

Sorry. You can take a look at this nation today and ask yourself what voting for RINOs has gained you

It has gained us eight years without a second '9/11'.

In all honesty, this is a very pyrric victory.  You know as well as I do that we have let 70,000 Saudi Arabian nationals enter our nation on education visas.  They're here right now.  And what nation was most represented on the 09/11 terrorist roster?  That's right, Saudi Arabian nationals.  Their populace is something like 66% Wahabbi Muslems, one of the most anti-U.S. sects there is.  It took 19 people to carry out 09/11, and we have 70,000 potentials here right now.  I appreciate the fact that there haven't been any more 09/11s, but you know as well as I do that could end any second, and the person you're touting is the main reason why.

Despite 09/11, Bush has also allowed anywhere from 1.5 to 3.5 million people to pour across our borders.  Most of those people wanting to enter due to being poor, but others entered to perpetrate mahem on U.S. citizens.  Murders, Rapes, Assaults, Molestations, Robberies, Grand Theft Auto, you name it and the U.S. Citizen is subject to you because of Bush.  Not only that, but it is acknowledged that foreign nationals other than Mexicans and South Americans have come over our southern border, and some of them come from the Middle-East.

No 09/11?  By the grace of God bud, not because of someone actually caring enough to get things under control.

It has gained us a great Conservative Surpreme Court Justice and maybe two.

If that is so, and we appointed 7/9ths of the court (republicans did), then why is it the Second Amendment case before the court now is in serious doubt?  And why is it that the Attorney General of the United States was instructed to develop and deliver a brief that would undercut your and my position on this decision?  You tout that this president appointed great judges, and now there is clear evidence that at his direction an effort is being levied to do just the opposit of what good judges are supposed to do.  Do you support that?  Do you really think Bush is just aces?

It has gained us and incredible Military that it's soldiers are proud of and they proud to 'serve in'; while America continues to be it's beneficiary.

I expect our military to be proud.  I am proud of them too.  That doesn't make F15s grounded any easier to accept.  Now that isn't Bush's fault, but it does point to the issue of military peparedness, an area where we do have other concerns.  Bush has mothballed 25% of our Naval fleet since coming to office, formally adopted the one theater status of military preparedness, and is in the process of destroying 75% of our nuclear arsenal.  Are you proud of that?

These past eight years have gained us a fairer taxation.

Yes it has temporarily.  Those tax changes will expire in 2010 I believe.  It would have been nice to have the made them permanent when we had a republican majority, but that wasn't deemed worthy.  And it's part of the reason why I ask if it really matters if we have one.  You could provide me a list of twenty items they should have moved on, but didn't.  Are you proud of that?

We have not been incorporated into the UN; nor a 'world government';

On one of the last days of the Clinton administration, he signed an approval and fired it off concerning the International Criminal Court.  President Bush ignored that act until a few days before the ICC was to receive the last few nation's approval to become ratified.  For months Bush kept his mouth shut concerning this matter while good friends of ours signed on to help ratify the ICC.  We could have rescinded our approval and moved friends away from ratification.  Did we?  No.  It wasn't important.  And now we answer to the ICC.

Bush has taked up the development of a three nation security agreement.  He proposes that we relax our borders internally, and shore up defense around the parimeter of the three nations.  Anotherwords, this will in essense make us closer to being one nation, and less sovereign.  It will make it easier for people to pass across Canadian and Mexican border lines with the U.S.  This is something that has been the U.N.'s goal for all nations.  It has caused substantial problems in Europe, and not learning the lesson from that, Bush wants to do it here.

Bush is also a big fan of the FTAA.  I can only assume he is a big fan of the AU as well.  You state that we have not been incorporated into the U.N., but that's rather laughable since we're doing precisely what the U.N. blueprint sees as the Americas' best destiny, from it's point of view.

Our Deparment of Education has come up with all sorts of lame brain ideas.  Those came from UNESCO, a U.N. agency that most folks think of as an international provider of food and disaster relief.  Well, it also devises education curicula.  That curicula is terrible.  It spreads the U.N.'s agenda in a number of ways.  It plays down nationalism and plays up the global family view.  It makes animals godlike.  It plays up the earth in the same manner.  Corporation are evil.  Found fathers are flawed.  Martin Luther King is the single most important person in American history.  Religion is not trustworthy.  Homosexuality is a fine wholesome lfiestyle, and children shouldn't make any judgements about it, or even make hasty decsions about their own sexuality until they have reviewed all options.  And last but not least, parents are flawed and your teachers are trained to teach children appropriate whereas parents are not.

No we're not incorporated into the U.N. or anything like that huh.

And what department did Bush double the budget for in his first term?  The Department of Education.

...nor are we part of the Kyoto Treaty;

Are you aware that city and county and state level govenrment agencies are implementing Kyoto on their own?  There are state commissions across this nation that are designed to help out any way they can.  Please don't think that we dodged that bullet.  In actuality, we haven't.  Now, would it have been worse if Bush had signed on?  I think it would.  I can not say for certain, but I do believe it would have.  You will note that our ambassador to the last summit stated that we would be signing on in time.  The inference was that we need to see a few more changes before we can, but don't bet the farm on the idea that those will be implemented before we do.  Liberal republicans are not very solid on stuff like this.  If Bush were president for another four years, I blieve he would sign on.  And if we get another liberal republican, I believe they will instead.

Now, the Law of the Sea Treaty is out there and have you heard Bush say one word about it?  It's a massive power grab for the United Nations, will set up independent funding and basicly be the end of freedom on the high seas.  Has Bush spearheaded objections to this?  No, he has been missing in action on it.  And if he pulls the ICC game plan out of his ass, we're in serious trouble.

This treaty could cause all manner of trouble for our military.  Like I said, it would fund the U.N.  The U.N. could then start it's own military, navy, you name it.  Bush is quiet as a church mouse on the subject, and we've seen how that turned out the last time.

...nor are we functioning at a 'no growth 'Green' level - we are not yet riding bikes to school or work;

I don't know what state you live in, but I can tell you there are states where some of this is beginning to be implemented.  There is serious talk in my state of having the utilities control the thermostat in our homes.  There's been very little leadership at the top to combat the global warming nonsense, and some state have gone stark raving madd, in their furvor to save us all.

and we can still 'debate' Global Warming; and we still have Conservative talk radio.

Yep, and we can talk about all issues, because free enterprise provides it.  Bush must think PBS and NPR are a great idea.  He's had seven years to defund them.  He had both houses and gave it a pass.  You and I pay to develop leftist propaganda to defeat our rights and founding principles.  Isn't it grand.

Parent's can still 'home-school' their children; and most can still decide what their kids can take to school - for lunch - in their lunch bag.

Can you still send peanut butter sandwiches to school?  I know a lot of schools won't allow it these days.  As for home schooling, that's basicly a day to day situation.  I don't think it's a very solid situation, but technically you are correct, it is still legal.  I advocate it whenever I get the opportunity.

As American's; we live with incredible prosperity; abundance and choices. And despite all our problems;and according to polls; most American's are happy with their lives; and economically; are OK.

Look, even at the end of the Clinton eight years, you could have said the same thing.  We both loathed those years, but somehow the nation survived.

And this is just a quick, short list. . .but would venture to say; had we had a Lib/Demrat/Leftist working 'their way'; from the top. . .down; few of the above observations would apply, today.

Okay, let's say you wouldn't have been able to say some of this.  Dare I say it, with a good conservative in there, we could have kept our navy at 100%.  We could have kept our nuclear stockpile.  We could have defunded NPR and PBS.  We could have eliminated the Department of Education.  We could have put to an end the practice of allowing the U.N. to influence our educataion system and our children.  We could have set up a system to end the education portion of taxation, and left that in the home communities.  We could have had local communities incorporate their schools.  Those teachers that wanted to hire on under the new "NON UNION" schools could have done so.  Otherwise other non union teachers could have been fired.  We could have made the tax cuts permanent.  We could have set up a national sales tax and eliminated the IRS, or severely reduced it.  We could have started a manhattan level program to get ourselves energy independent in eight years.  We could have made sure we had a two theater military preparedness capability.  We could have told the U.N. to get out.  We could have boarded up the windows and made a monument to sovereignty and the sactitiy of our nation.  We could have closed our southern border.  We could have taken away every reason for illegal aliens to remain in our nation.  We could have given Bill and Hillary Clinton a fair trial.  Need I go on?  You can finish it.  You're as aware of this stuff as I am.

Why are we settling for such dismal people?  In which decade are we going to finally demand them?

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you for the honorable mention, but I’m not signing on to a guy from one of the most liberal states in the nation to be president.

Pete Wilson was my governor in 1992 or so. He wanted the slot quite badly. He was a republican and had done a fairly good job, and excellent one by today’s standards. I wouln’t back him for the very same reason.

He wasn’t a conservative. I’m not going to do that to the nation even for my own governor.

[Gondring]

It’s winner take all by Congressional District, of which there are 15.

With three delegates from each of those districts....PLUS the At-Large, State, and Bonus delegatse---which are parceled out proportionally, right?

Of course, that's the pre-penalized level. Do you know how the penalized level distribution is being done? I'd have guessed that they would have been all taken from the districts (such that there would be 1 delegate per congressional district instead of 3), but some websites seem to indicate that isn't the case. Do you know?

[Gondring]

Parent's can still 'home-school' their children

I'm curious...were you home-schooled? ;-)

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

There is so much in #407, I don’t know where to start... It is 100% dead on the mark...

[Gondring]

Besides, the margin in MI, last I checked, was hovering around 9-10%.

Statewide margin.

However, much of Gov. Romney's support was lumped in Detroit, and with by-district delegate assignment, Sen. McCain gets almost the same number of delegates as Gov. Romney. :-(

[Gondring]

I am afraid Paul will be a spoiler for the GOP in the general election...

I'm afraid the GOP nominee will be a spoiler for conservatives in the general election...

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you for the note of agreement. I do appreciate it.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I don’t know why the left wasn’t de-funded... They run their 501(c) scams all day long...

If there was mandatory drug testing for all paid employees of 501(c) Tax Exempt Corporations as a condition for “non-profit” status written into the Internal Revenue Code, the left wing front groups (like Greenpeace, Sierra Club, PETA, CAIR, ACLU, etc, etc, ad nausea) would dry up and blow away like aging dung...

Whenever I hear or see some leftist commentary about “corporate welfare” in the media from one such entity, I can never for the life of me figure out why the Republican doesn’t call the 501(c) Tax Exempt Corporation “corporate welfare.”

[traditional1]

Romney is a RINO, period.

If that's what conservatives have to put up with, that's sad.

There's no glory in electing a Liberal just because he has an (R) by his name on the ballot. He's a loser for principled conservative values.

[traditional1]

The Hildabeast will be voted for by the Dimwits who constitute about 40-45% of the electorate, no matter if Charles Manson was on the ticked as long as he had the (D) next to his name. The women who watch soap operas and Oprah will vote for Hildy SIMPLY because they want to see a “woman have a chance for a change”. That’s pretty much enough to get 50% of the vote, and with the lunatic fringe/youth voters she will not be beaten as the issues are not something she can or will discuss.

[traditional1]

Obviously, you are what created the term "Mitt-wit"...

Romney is no more Republican than McLame, and his socialized medicine and faggot-promoting home State is indicative of where he would take the entire country, if given a chance.

Sorry; you don't get elected Governor of a dark blue state by being a Conservative.

Deal with it.

[fortheDeclaration]

I support Hunter, Paul, Thompson, and Romney, not necessarily in that order. I’d crawl on broken glass to vote in November. If Thompsom doesn’t get elected in November, how about the Supreme Court? Although I’d prefer Ted Olsen, sometimes you have to go with the most electable candidate. ;) And Giuliani wouldn’t be so bad as Attorney General? Will Clinton name who must be named to get the black vote? How does She calculate that? And would you sell life insurance to a VP, short-term, pre-election, that wasn’t Her first choice? I think I’d pass on that one.

I think when this all shakes out, Romney will be the nominee, not Thompson.

[from occupied ga]

Finally, a REPUBLICAN won.

Romney a Republican? Who knew? Looking at his record in MA I thought he was he was a Democrat that was somehow mislabeled.