Posted on 11/16/2011 2:52:56 PM PST by Syncro
Read More »
IF NOT ROMNEY, WHO? IF NOT NOW, WHEN?
November 16, 2011So now, apparently, we have to go through the cycle of the media pushing Newt Gingrich. This is going to be fantastic.
In addition to having an affair in the middle of Clinton's impeachment; apologizing to Jesse Jackson on behalf of J.C. Watts -- one of two black Republicans then in Congress –- for having criticized "poverty pimps," and then inviting Jackson to a State of the Union address; cutting a global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi; supporting George Soros' candidate Dede Scozzafava in a congressional special election; appearing in public with the Rev. Al Sharpton to promote nonspecific education reform; and calling Paul Ryan's plan to save Social Security "right-wing social engineering," we found out this week that Gingrich was a recipient of Freddie Mac political money.
(Even I will admit, however, that Newt was great when he was chairman of GOPAC back in the '90s with Gay Gaines at the helm.)
Although Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- the institutions most responsible for the nation's current financial crisis -- were almost entirely Democratic cash cows, they managed to dirty up enough Republicans to make it seem like bipartisan corruption.
Democrats sucked hundreds of millions of dollars out of these institutions: Franklin Raines, $90 million; Jamie Gorelick, $26.4 million; Jim Johnson, $20 million.
By contrast, Republicans came cheap. For the amazingly good price of only $300,000 apiece, Fannie and Freddie bought the good will of former Reps. Vin Weber, R-Minn., Susan Molinari, R-N.Y., and Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.* Former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, R-N.Y., was even cheaper at $240,000.
[*Correction: After Gingrich admitted last week to receiving $300,000 from Freddie, we found out this week that it was actually closer to $1.6 million.]
So now conservatives shy away from denouncing these crooked organizations for fear of running into Vin Weber at a cocktail party.Sorry, guys -- on the plus side, you're millionaires, but on the downside, you've earned the contempt of your fellow man.
The mainstream media keep pushing alternatives to Mitt Romney not only because they are terrified of running against him, but also because they want to keep Republicans fighting, allowing Democrats to get a four-month jump on us.
Meanwhile, everyone knows the nominee is going to be Romney.
That's not so bad if you think the most important issues in this election are defeating Obama and repealing Obamacare.
Oh please, she is anything but a closet liberal. She views the candidates, all of them weak, and believes Romney is the guy that will win. That’s all she is saying. She also knows he has the best chance to beat Obama. Gingrich is the smartest of the GOP candidates, but he will get killed in the media and has way too much baggage as she correctly exposes.
Cain, he won’t even finish in the top 2...he is starting to fade. It will be Romney, whether we like it or not. I’ll get attacked for saying that, but I’ve been more right than wrong on this stuff the last 24 months (Sharon Angle, O’Donnell, etc).
The next question will be if he is the nominee, will people here and elsewhere stay home or vote 3rd party to guarantee Obama another 4 years? Do they want a 100% liberal (Obama) or a 60% conservative (Rommney)?
I prefer Newt over Mutt any day. But to have a poll amongst the two candidates while ignoring others makes it a pretty worthless poll.
Romney is not a conservative.
He is a RINO and will govern as one if elected.
I don’t want him anywhere near the White House.
I’m not so sure about the Senate, after the should-have-won 2010 races in Nevada, Alaska, and Colorado. The GOP should be at 49 right now. Of course, the Nevada race was the hardest to stomach. Reid should have been toast, but he received a gift in the form of the disastrous Sharon Angle.
She's sMitten!
So based on issues only, Perry considered pro-gay, pro-abortion, anti-Second Amendment liberal Rudy Giuliani 'more Reagan like" than all the above mentioned candidates. There's just no defending that.
I wasn't aware of this until you brought it up on this thread.
I haven't ever supported Rick Perry for president because he's been pinging my radar the wrong way ever since I've lived in Texas. Something about the man just seems fake to me. This is just one more bit of hard evidence that my gut instincts have been right about him.
I want the Ann Coulter back who said McCain was to the left of Hillary.
Appropos of this column: 
Palin 2012: The Perfect Storm.
Ah yes, Fred Thompson. How I wish he had gotten into the 2008 race early and with the required heart and energy. He had a solid conservative record. He was charismatic. And he has a great voice and is a great speaker.
And unlike any other Republican running then (except Tancredo of course) or now, he had a plan for conservative immigration reform which didn’t include a path to citizenship for illegals. That by itself is not unique among the current crop, but Thompson actually came at legal immigration from a conservative standpoint (i.e. he didn’t call for increasing it). His plan called for ending Ted Kennedy’s Diversity Visa program, and for ending unending family chain migration.
Oh well, I guess there’s no point in indulging in what-might-have-beens.
I want a conservative. So I'll vote for one. That will not be Romney.
You're being far too generous to Mittens. He's nowhere near to being 60% conservative. I don't know that I'd even give him a 40% conservative rating, given his record and his past statements.
But Romney is a 100% political opportunist, who will spin whichever way the win blows. He's got no real core values, and is well-known for being all over the map, which is why he's almost uniformly despised on this website.
Just a little reminder that Mitt's been a trickster for a long time now. Here's a thread from January 2008 (the linked article is from 2006!): Is Mitt Romney Conservative? (Gov Romney Supported Abortion & Gay Agenda with Judges & Boy Scouts)
Well who knows for sure what Romney would do if elected.
But one thing we know for sure is what Obama will do, especially with the Supreme Court. He has already nominated and got easily approved two absolutely horrible leftwing activist judges, who will be voting to rewrite the Constitution for decades to come.
We lost yet another chance to right the Court with the election of Obama. If he wins again, its almost certain that Ginsburg will retire so that he can replace her, and Breyer may do the same. But with Ginsburg at least, she may not last no matter who wins, and a Republican may get a golden opportunity to replace her. And while they are by all accounts in good health, who knows how much longer Scalia and Kennedy will stay on the Court?
I’m not a fan of Romney. But with Perry’s implosion (and Bush-like self-righteous liberalism on immigration), and Gingrich’s baggage (and liberalism on immigration) there just isn’t much to get all that excited about. Cain is okay, but I wonder about the source of the enthusiasm for him.
Romney may suck. He probably does in fact, but he would be preferable to Obama. And that’s what I’ll be doing next year; voting against Obama.
People say that and believe it, but is it true? And where's the evidence?
Who were those people? McCain had his core staff. Romney had his. Anybody who jumped from Romney to McCain after the nomination would be subordinate to long-time McCainites.
So far as I can find out one of Romney's top people went over to McCain's campaign after the nomination. There were probably others in lower positions, but whatever was coming out of McCain's campaign about Palin had to be the work mostly of McCain loyalists.
Somebody in the McCain campaign who got close enough to Palin to have any first-hand contact and knowledge would almost certainly have been a long-time McCainite. So was some random Romneyite in the McCain campaign badmouthing Palin? It's possible, but does that justify all the indignation and righteousness people have about this story?
There's more evidence that McCain loyalists were badmouthing both Palin and Romney for whatever reasons of their own. I have to wonder whether this attack on rumormongering about Palin is simply rumormongering about Romney.
I would vote for a gridlocked Ubama before I would vote for a green-lit Myth, Annette.
Go Newt! Skeletons, warts, and all...the smartest Man standing!
Representing California's 52nd congressional district, Duncan Hunter was one of the most outspoken representatives regarding immigration reform and was the driving force behind the border fence.
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/02/07/congressman-duncan-hunter-demands-feds-install-border-fence/
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.
