Posted on 02/07/2008 9:51:12 AM PST by mbraynard
You rallied behind someone who never had their heart in the race and was never a leader in their life (Thompson) or never had a chance in hell (Hunter). What is needed more than anything to win the WH is a drive to do the spade work necessary to get there. So by denying Romney victory in IA and NH and SC, and splitting the field, you now have probably the worst enemy of all - someone the Wonderful Mr. Jim Robinson never saw fit to put a 'truth file' on.
So, nice work.
“Lots of people become MORE conservative as they age.”
You are talking about a gradual part of the maturing process, in Mitt’s case it was a 57 year old politician that became a totally different person for this current campaign.
The man has no integrity or honesty or principles.
We lost and that is just the way it is. We just have to live with it.
We have another eight years of Clinton. I just feel bad for the thousands of innocent people that will die as we defend radical Islam like we did last time.
Lincolnesque too, as in short, direct and to the point.
Don't think so. I think this was the poster's opus.
But now that Romney is out, so am I. I cannot vote for McCain or Huck after what happened in WVa.
MuckCain is a CINO, not a RINO!!!
You are right as rain!!!
At the risk of repeating myself:
Staying home on election day won't send a message to Republican leaders. Neither will voting for McCain. Well, a McCain vote will send the message that conservatives are not principled but party voters; and therefore the Republican leadership can continue to push candidates like McCain and Romney and bury candidates like Thompson and Hunter, and we will rollover and expose our bellies out of fear of the (continually self-destructing) Democrats. Voting for a third party candidate WILL send a proper message, either to the Republican party which has abandoned it's conservative principles or to the "new" party that actually offers us conservative candidates.
I think we (meaning conservatives) should be discussing the conservative boni fides of various third parties and their candidates rather than harping to each other about McCain/Romney/Huckabee/Hillary/Obama. And FreeRepublic should be hosting that conversation and inviting all to attend and present their "case for conservatism".
The country survived eight years of Billary and we will survive four or eight years of Hillarbill or Obama _IF_ conservatives use that time to build a strong base in a new/different party, or a Republican party that "got the message" when we voted on principle rather than on politics in 2008. A party, new or changed, whose political philosophy is closer to that of Reagan, as well as the 1994 Republicans under Gingrich.
"Principled" means conservative first, Republican second. That's my opinion, your mileage may vary.
(I pinged you, Jim, since I offered a suggestion for the site. I'll leave it's merit to your personal judgment.)
I am as anti-amnesty as anyone here. But, we’ll get amnesty with McCain, Obama or Hillary — so its really not an issue worth debating right now. And, at least McCain SAYS he has had a change of heart on amnesty (whether its true or not remains to be seen) — Obama and Hillary don’t. Voting against McCain because of amnesty will guarantee the WH to Hillary or Obama ... and you’ll get amnesty. That’s a bit counterproductive.
In fact, I’d say we’re more likely to get amnesty with a Democrat than with McCain, because the true conservatives in Congress will have more control if there’s a Republican in the WH.
The war on terror credentials to which I was referring was the fact that McCain is a staunch supporter of the global war on terror, of staying the course in Iraq, of being hardline on Iran, etc.
>> To hope for McCain to die in office is unrealistic. Imagine the damage someone of his bad character and mental health can do.
To elect Obama or Hillary would be far more detrimental to the well-being of the country. McCain isn’t running in a vacuum — it isn’t McCain or nobody, its either him or Hillary/Obama. I’d prefer McCain.
H
“Don’t think so. I think this was the poster’s opus”
Regardless, a post like that one without a single reply begs to be called an act of cowardice in my book. What bull.
Romney was a conservative?
I don’t think that he is, was, or ever will be.
The embracement of Romney by the “conservative” media was a disgrace.
B.S., Huckabee doomed himself with his high school level understanding of foreign policy issues, and his miserable record in Arkansas.
Thank you! I've been felling this way for some time now. I didn't leave the GOP, the GOP left me (apology to President Reagan, God rest his soul.)
felling=feeling. The anger sometimes makes my fingers fail me.
Right....I dont need Rush to tell me what to think.
If you are referring to Clinton losing the congress to the republicans after two years in office, we can’t count on that happening again. Nor can we afford the appalling damage the next Clinton would inflict on us while we wait.
And our beebers have been stuned! LOL
(That's got to be a new classic word to add to FR's list.)
Thanks for the kind words. I've been meaning to post this for some time, but wanted a year as a Freeper for credibility. My words will sting some of our more liberal Freepers.
"But now that Romney is out, so am I. I cannot vote for McCain or Huck after what happened in WVa."
I'm right there with you!!!
And I'm too damned angry to explain it.
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.