Posted on 02/28/2009 6:07:30 PM PST by RED SOUTH
Oh, forgot. Actual victims of Slick Willard’s actions don’t matter to you.
Over the years, Romney has opposed the Reagan-Bush agenda of the 1980`s, opposed Newt's Contract With America and never found the GOP to be worthy of his time. Not to mention his flip-flopping on abortion rights, gay rights and gun control.
"Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush.
I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush."
~~~ Mitt Romney Video Link
"In my view, [the Contract With America] is not a good idea..."
~~~ Mitt RomneyVideo Link
Romney Opposes the The Republican party Video Link
"I RESPECT and will protect a woman's right to choose. . . . Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's."
~~~ Mitt Romney to NARAL, April 2002
Mitt Romney = political chameleon.
What possible political motive would Romney gain from their deaths? It is not evidence that he intends to implode the GOP intentionally from the inside. It is evidence that Romney selected an incompetant judge who made a foolish decision. However regrettable and tragic - and it is exceedingly - Romney is not responsible for their deaths, nor is the judge even although she is more responsible since she is made the decision to free the killer. It is the killer who is responsible. Conservatives believe that. Conservatives do not scapegoat society or even others for someone’s own actions, in this case that killer’s decision to murder. The killer is responsible. Is that judge scum? Yes. Did Romney make a mistake? Yes. But enough with your red herrings.
I said shapter and verse. You laid it on thick so give it to me thick. You made grandiose allegations so give me a grandiose mound of evidence. Romney is more dishonest than the Clintons, wants to implode the GOP intentionally from the inside, and is a master deceiver and con artist. You must show evidence of THOSE THINGS.
Many so-called conservatives become absolutely indistinguishable from loony Democrats when the subject is Mitt Romney. In fact, even the hard-left Boston Glob magically becomes a reliable source of unbiased analysis when it comes to Romney.
Don't expect reasoned arguments from the Mitt-haters. You'll waste a lot of time and energy wrestling that particular pig.
I can see why this will go nowhere. Naturally I will respond to what you just posted. You will dismiss my response. Regardless, what you just posted still does not prove that Romney is “more dishonest than the Clintons” which is one hell of an ‘accomplishment’ - and is eager to destroy the GOP from the inside, in fact, hell bent on it.
So why should I bother to rebut? Your argument is that he is a liberal Republican who simply wants to be President and the way to do that is cut some corners and say what people want to hear. I never argued that given some of Romney’s changes over the course of MANY YEARS that I couldn’t accept that some people had a right to feel that way (although I disagreed).
This is not the evidence I am talking about although videos are a start. As far as I’m concerned DJ’s rage requires nothing less than a body count. I am talking about political assassinations not failed judicial appointments. I want “Watergate break-ins,” I want to hear the secret tapes. Give me chapter and verse. If DJ is going to level grandiose charges, DJ needs to match that with grandiose evidence. There are plenty of Clinton body count sites (whether you believe them or not) - I want to see Romney’s. I’m still listening.
I always give reasoned arguments and good reasons why I oppose Romney. You just haven't seen them. Sometimes, you just gotta tell it like it is.
I agree. Screw Whitman and the Romney he rode in with.
~~~ Jim Robinson, February 26, 2009 LINK
Their MURDERS, Norm. Their murders are a singular demonstration of the man’s executive decisions, and where he couldn’t be bothered with something as mundane as vetting a judicial applicant because he had a lunch date to keep. Their MURDERS came at an inconvenient time during his campaign and blew open the falsehood that this “man” was a competent Governor. He didn’t give a damn except in how it HURT him and his campaign.
The fact that you have to have that explained to you repeatedly speaks more to you than it does to me. You cry out like every paid bot, “Show me evidence !” and you’ve been shown mountains of evidence in thousands of posts and thousands of threads. You refuse to look at it or you excuse it away with some convenient talking point (indeed, dirtying Reagan’s name to try to score a cheap point, truly despicable). Murders don’t seem to matter to you or to your compatriots. Always everybody else’s fault, never Slick Willard’s. Sorry, Norm. Reagan believed in taking responsibility for his own actions. Slick Willard never has and never will.
Your credibility, like your candidates, has vanished into the ether. You’re no more than just another disruptive liberal troll.
Just a prediction, but ultimately they will provide no such evidence because there is none. They can’t connect the dots for me because the two or three dots they have are do diffuse and far apart it forms nothing remotely resembing the image that is claimed to be Romney’s true interior.
The only thing Romney is guilty of is making the mistake as a young man (and as many young man are wont to make) of starting his political career as a liberal. With some that’s unforgiveable for life. As far as I’m concerned however conspiracies aside we are doomed as a movement if we can’t accept converts. It’s the political equivalent of abortion.
The two most successful conservative accomplishments of the last 30 years, Reaganism and the Contract With America, were both opposed by Willard Mitt Romney. You have Romney in his own words.
What more evidence do you require that will convince you, Romney is a phony and a fraud of the first order. He's no better then Rooty Toot. Rockefeller Republicans-Liberal Republicans.
Obviously, Romney has you hoodwinked, hook, line and sinker.
“annieturnyourgunin”.
We can only accept converts named Reagan.
What possible political motive would Romney gain from their deaths? It is not evidence that he intends to implode the GOP intentionally from the inside. It is evidence that Romney selected an incompetant judge who made a foolish decision. However regrettable and tragic - and it is exceedingly - Romney is not responsible for their deaths, nor is the judge even although she is more responsible since she is made the decision to free the killer. It is the killer who is responsible. Conservatives believe that. Conservatives do not scapegoat society or even others for someone’s own actions, in this case that killer’s decision to murder. The killer is responsible. Is that judge scum? Yes. Did Romney make a mistake? Yes. But enough with your red herrings.
I said shapter and verse. You laid it on thick so give it to me thick. You made grandiose allegations so give me a grandiose mound of evidence. Romney is more dishonest than the Clintons, wants to implode the GOP intentionally from the inside, and is a master deceiver and con artist. You must show evidence of THOSE THINGS.
If you keep going back to this Mouck case then I know you've got nothing but a bad, even tragic, judicial appointment. I want to see the heavy fifth columnist stuff. I'm still listening.
"indeed, dirtying Reagan’s name to try to score a cheap point, truly despicable"
OK, I'll give you an easy one. Show me exactly where I "dirt[ied] Reagan's name" on this thread. (sigh, yes I'll play along once again with your red herrings...)
Romney has no conservative credentials to speak of. He was almost 60 years old when he first started making his first conservative noises. Romney can barely call himself a Republican. Willard was a one term Governor whose biggest accomplishment was putting Massachusetts on the path to socialized medicine. BFD!
Comparing Romney to Reagan, is like Obama comparing himself to Lincoln.
If that is the case and I have no reason to doubt you, then I must conclude you've sold out. You've abandoned conservatism and no longer have the credibility to argue in the name of rightwing conservative politics.
Now, don't go ballistic. I didn't call you a liberal. But you're definitely no conservative. I think you, like many other folks --- John McCain for one --- may have stood with Reagan and Gingrich on the conservative upswing, but today you've lost your way and are no longer interested in advancing Constitutional conservatism. Therefore, you're not a serious player.
Did he ace the swimsuit competition? What did his evening gown look like?
” He did shift positions over the course of a decade and that always raises some level of suspicion.
What decade was that and which issues, I think more in terms of 2005 to 2007 or 2008.
What do you have in mind with that decade stuff?
That is an excuse. You assume that I follow every Romney thread. I don't. Humor me. Show me it here and now. Show me something politically criminal. Show me a political assassination. Some me a secret tape or photograph. Something. Anything. Something besides a poor judicial appointment.
I'm going to bed now. I look back to see what you've come up with tomorrow morning or afternoon. Good night.
BTW you calling me a troll is in very poor taste. We have exchanged posts on these boards for a long time now. You know better than that. It's a cheap cop out. If I were a troll I would not be spending a quarter of my night BEGGING you to prove your case that Romney is a criminal, murdering, power-grabbing, supernational certified preowned car salesman, politically-speaking, hell bent on the intentional destruction of the GOP and conservatism. Forgive me for saying so but you talk a big game, my FRiend. Now it's batter-up time. I'm rooting for you.
G'night.
“True, his father is now, but His mother isn’t and I think the last I read she worked and lived in Saudi.”
Do you have sources for that?
Jindal’s mom is in about her 31st year of working for the state of Louisiana as far as I know.
You can conclude that but you're wrong. Like I said I looked at the evidence and found Romney wanting but ultimately not guilty, or guilty of being a young liberal and changing his mind. I have accepted that his private sector experience and economic expertise is what we need in a leader now. Romney has shown to my satisfaction the willingness to bat for the home team repeatedly and without hesitation. He talks a good game and he's sold me. He's a late convert, but I accept that, with reservations, but I accept it. I looked him up and down and he makes muster. We live in an age where it is politically impossible to campaign as one thing and govern as a complete opposite.
"I must conclude you've sold out...Therefore, you're not a serious player."
What you should be saying is I'm not a purist. I wouldn't call myself a pragmatist either. Actually personally I'm very conservative. I just view this country in realistic terms. I'm a play with the team you've got guy, not a dreamer (although I have a little of that). So let's call it that. It will go a great deal of distance in helping the tone of these boards. We need to stop undercutting each other's motives with our own assumptions. We are ultimately on the same team, you and I, even DJ. Ultimately I stand with DJ (although he will deny it and spit) before I am ever with someone politically like Obama. Maybe not with reagards to Romney but ultimately.
I am a Conservative.
Good night.
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.