Posted on 04/02/2009 7:01:07 PM PDT by GOP_Lady
For Crying out loud!!!!! Every time Romney wins it’s because he bought the vote. Produce REAL evidence for your charge, AC, not some schmuck’s iterated suspicions from their blog.
That’s right, no more Bushes, no more Arnolds, but lets give the girls a chance who can’t talk their way out of a paper bag. That’s who we need to give a chance to next! I’m sorry, but being President is a man’s job, unless your name is Margret Thatcher, a tough old broad who can go toe to toe with the best of them with her mouth. We don’t need girls who play games. There is a time and place for that but not in the White House, because the fact is, it’s a man’s job. I don’t give a hoot what the liberals say! You can call me sexist, go right on ahead! I don’t want a girl who does the feminine sch-tick with the racy red boots and the short skirts calling the shots with the real power brokers behind her with the brains. That’s not what I want. Sure Palin can spend all her energy sounding feisty. It’s easy to do when all you really have to be concerned about is making sure your “lipstick” is on right! Hey, I’m a girl too, I know, I get it, and that’s not who I want “running” the show. You Boys out there need to get a life out there and get a girlfriend or something. This is getting ridiculous! Come on, there is a time and place for everything and some people around here need to get some priorities!
I would be shocked if Mitt even seriously ran in 2012. I doubt he would get any more support than he was able to garner in 2008.
If we weren’t in such ideological times, I think he would have been a competent President, rather than the incompetent one we have now.
There is a line we are eventually going to have to live with, or else we will never win any elections. A majority of this country is not solid conservative. A majority is not strongly fundamentalist christian, or strongly fiscal conservative, or strongly anything we want.
We have a solid minority for most of the conservative philosophy, and could bring over a majority of people who aren’t sure if we could articulate the vision.
It is unfortunate that some, even some who are otherwise known to be pro-life, are less certain on the subject of embryonic research.
I was talking with my daughter about Governor Kaine signing our Virginia anti-embryonic-stem-cell legislation (prohibiting tax dollars). She said she thought it was OK if you used the leftovers from in-vitro fertilization that were going to be discarded anyway.
My problem is that whatever you do with those embryos is killing. A few of them can be recycled to other women, but at best most of them will be kept “permanently” frozen, which isn’t any better than killing them.
The only real pro-life position is to only make embryos you implant — although given that there is such a low success rate in implantation, even the act of fertilizing an embryo and implanting it is like killing babies, since you are likely to kill more than end up being born.
Embryonic research isn’t getting anywhere, and we shouldn’t spend government money on it. It pains me when any person who says they are pro-life is willing to support using my tax dollars for it.
I think it is more productive to discuss the issue of embryonic stem cells, and what the ramifications of in-vitro fertilization are for the pro-life movement, than just use it as another platform for attacking politicians.
But that’s because I’d rather solve problems than affix blame, and I’d rather elect someone who mostly agrees with me than refuse to vote for anybody who isn’t perfect.
He’s really too old to be considered in 2012, whatever other problems he may have.
Of course, we’ve pretty much written of Jindal because of one bad speech (except some people wrote him off last year after 2 months in office when he actually had to govern).
We are very hard on our allies. Almost harder than we are on the opposition.
I never wanted to support Romney, because of all the animosity toward him. But people who hated different candidates never got around to finding one we could all support. So we ended up with McCain.
Hopefully in 2012 we’ll find someone we can all get behind who is qualified, articulate, and can fight through the “baggage slingers” of the media. Probably someone with a lot of experience and no skeletons in the closet, although that’s a lot to hope for.
You know who made up that word “RINO?” The same people who have now decided that you are part of the “Neo-Cons?” Neo-con is a term that I didn’t even know existed a few months ago. Now this horrible, degrading term is being used to describe the Republican base. It’s just awful. The word “Neo” bring to mind “Neo-nazi” and the word “Con” brings to mind “con-artist.” It’s very derogatory to use those words. Those words are meant to conquer and divide. I have been warning people it is a really bad idea to use words like “RINO” because this is a tactic right out of the communist play book. To label and marginalize your enemy. Well people out there aren’t listening. And so the purging goes from the Republican Party! Meanwhile now, since you are allowing the Democrats to write your play book for you, now YOU are being marginalized with the terms that liken the base to the Nazi’s! That’s nice, that’s really nice! I wonder when will people start to learn their lesson? Don’t tell me, when it’s too late. People like Romney are not your problem, believe me!
I am a supporter of Romney and my conservative credentials are second to none. You can name call and attempt to intimidate folks all you want but you are obviously doing more harm than good to the conservative movement when you attempt to stop serious discussion of ideas.
I agree with you, I just want someone articulate. That is really important to me. At least Romney can articulate. I am just hoping that he is an inspiration to someone else out there who is capable. I understand completely what you are saying. I agree wholeheartedly, his time seems to have passed and he has too many hurdles to overcome with some of his past liberal declarations and also with being a Mormon. But I still like what he has to say and I hope someone out there is inspired to be the kind of leader that Mitt could have been had he not been a Mormon and also not taken some of the stands he had in the past. I think people are really foolish to put their hopes in some “girl” who gets by playing games that girls play. She’s no biblical figure head the way some people like to talk her up. Please, the woman can’t even run her own family! And she can’t articulate either without a speech that was written for her either. Please! I want something better. Palin is clearly just a puppet who does her little horse and pony show sounding all feisty. That’s a game that gets the boys going. But the girls who are honest see Palin for what she is and we don’t like it!
The GOP ran out of gas years ago. Basically they’ve run off Reagan and Newt and conservatives.
We need a generation change. Dump the losers.
I think people are fearful of him saying the right things, because they are certain the only end to this is another presidential run.
I can’t say Romney won’t try it again, just that I don’t fear it will work, like some people seem to.
So I just like when he says something I agree with, because he’s pretty good at saying it well. I do wish he hadn’t had such a poor history.
Remember how Reagan told HW Bush, this is my microphone? How Reagan fired the entire air traffic union. How Newt and that congress made all the MSM a tizzy and enemies of Tip O’Neil?
Mitt could never do that. He can not pull the trigger. He’s a ‘can’t we all get along Republican’.
He’s got no political stones. He’s a finger in the wind, pole driven, bi-partisan, put aside our differences Republican. No broken glass crawl for Mitt.
“You know who made up that word “RINO?” The same people who have now decided that you are part of the “Neo-Cons?” Neo-con is a term that I didn’t even know existed a few months ago. Now this horrible, degrading term is being used to describe the Republican base. It’s just awful. The word “Neo” bring to mind “Neo-nazi” and the word “Con” brings to mind “con-artist.” It’s very derogatory to use those words. Those words are meant to conquer and divide. I have been warning people it is a really bad idea to use words like “RINO” because this is a tactic right out of the communist play book.”
Word Origin & History
neo-conservative
Used in the modern sense by 1979:
“My Republican vote [in the 1972 presidential election] produced little shock waves in the New York intellectual community. It didn’t take long - a year or two - for the socialist writer Michael Harrington to come up with the term “neoconservative” to describe a renegade liberal like myself. To the chagrin of some of my friends, I decided to accept that term; there was no point calling myself a liberal when no one else did.” [Irving Kristol, “Forty Good Years,” “The Public Interest,” Spring 2005]
The term is attested from 1960, but it originally often was applied to Russell Kirk and his followers, who would be philosophically opposed to the modern neocons.
There is no comparison between a photo of a woman choosing to wear a bikini costume to a Halloween party, to promoting and defending a man who is willing to lie, cheat and deceive his way into running for the highest elected office in America. And I don't mean Barack Obama either.
The fact you found a silly, funny and innocuous thread more offensive then the liberal politics of a phony and a fraud named Mitt Romney --- someone who spent a lifetime supporting Roe v Wade; someone who believes there is a Constitutional right for women to murder their unborn children in the womb; someone who supports special rights for homosexuals; someone who supports gun control and limiting the rights of law abiding Americans to purchase and own firearms; someone who signed off on welfare state-socialized medicine; and someone who is now praising Obama and wants to see him succeed --- shows your outrage is misplaced, your priorities out of whack and your morals in the crapper.
As you well know, dragging arguments from other threads is not in keeping with the protocol of Free Republic. I guess since you think yourself better than everyone else, you don't have to follow protocol. Wrong!
I never said I was a Romney supporter, but why turn the guns on ourselves? Here is a question: If Romney would have been the standard bearer, do you think the Republicans would have lost a few less Senate and House seats? I think the answer is yes and the result would have been that the Repubs could have been able to better block some of this horrible stuff that is happening in Congress.
Like many, I voted for McCain because of Sarah. The Republicans desperately need to change the election laws in the various states, so that only registered Republicans vote in the primary. There are too many crossover voters that dilute the conservative vote.
I don't think Romney is the answer, but if we are going to fight Obama and have any chance of winning, we need focus on Obama and his supporters and not on our own selves.
As much as I loved Reagan, he was not totally orthodox. Remember his tax increases in 1986?
“Here is a question: If Romney would have been the standard bearer, do you think the Republicans would have lost a few less Senate and House seats? I think the answer is yes and the result would have been that the Repubs could have been able to better block some of this horrible stuff that is happening in Congress.”
With Romney it is always about rewriting history, Romney ran in the primary, he spent a fortune including 45 million dollars of his own money that he could inject at the most important down times, multiplying it’s effect. He had a slick seemingly unbeatable, well oiled campaign machine and an almost cult like labor organization and best of all no competition, what happened? republicans didn’t support him.
This isn’t a hypothetical that we can all speculate and fantasize about, against an empty field Romney already ran and he lost badly, the base doesn’t like him and would have stayed home on election day giving us larger losses all the way down the ticket.
Romney would not have chosen Palin and the Palin choice saved a lot of our down ticket races which is incredible for a vice presidential candidate.
Why keep rerunning the 2008 election anyway, our next election will consist of an entirely new set of candidates that are all governing successes that win elections and reelections, Romney’s only election victory, his failed single term as a governor with no reelection looks a little dingier and distant with each passing year.
You can do your own research, it was very well known at the time. If you choose to ignore it that is your problem, not mine.
I didn't see TA drag that argument to this thread, You and others have.
He has pandered to the log cabin republicans. Signed socialized heath care into law. And much more that has been documented.
"Because of thinking like yours, Obama is in the whitehouse"
How so? I held my nose and voted rino last Nov, to vote against zero. I am sick to death of voting for the lesser of the two liberals. Because of thinking like yours!!!!
NO MORE RINOS!
Then you're not paying attention.
Wow, you obviously have not been paying attention as to how she's single-handedly tying the Rats up in knots in Alaska...
Palin challenges denial of her Senate pick
Palin joins call for new Senate election after Stevens' case dropped
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.