Jim Robinson: Taking stock of our dwindling conservative inventory

Jan 5, 2011 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

Tea party favorite and pro-life conservative Sarah Palin and her family were viciously attacked to the point she chose not to run.

Congressional Tea Party Caucus leader and constitutional pro-life conservative Michele Bachmann had early promise, but I guess came across as too "shrill" and consequently her numbers driven down to the point she exited.

Successful pro-life conservative Texas Governor Perry hit the race at the top but due to missteps and less than stellar debate performances soon fizzled and is now all but gone.

Pro-life conservative businessman Cain and his famous 9-9-9 plan had promise, but was driven out due to indefensible allegations.

Pro-life Reagan Revolution conservative Newt Gingrich reinvigorated his campaign and soared to the top of the national polls, but was unacceptable to the establishment and apparently also unacceptable to the "true conservatives" among us and his numbers are now plummeting

You'd think "unquestionably" pro-life, pro-family conservative Rick Santorum whose recent surge took him to a tie in Iowa and who's now surging in the national polls might be good enough to stand against Romney for the base, but looks like there are "true conservatives" now attacking HIM as not good enough.

Well, drive them all out and who's left?

Huntsman? Who? Moonbat Paul?

Ideas anyone? Should we all continue attacking the conservatives we don't like until we drive them all out?

Personally, I could easily have lived with Palin, Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Newt or Santorum and would be proud to enthusiastically support any of them, warts and all. Any one of them is infinitely better than Obama or Romney.

But if we don't land on one soon and raise him up over Romney, guess who we're going to be stuck with? And it ain't going to be pretty. And if abortionist/statist/progressive Romney (or moonbat Paul) is the one, might as well get used to four more years of Obama. I won't vote for or support either one of those two.

I'd suggest that we all stop trying to tear down the other conservative candidates in the race and instead concentrate on trying to build up our own personal favorites. Who knows? May even discover an acceptable conservative (if not a great conservative) in the bunch. We've never had a perfect conservative yet. Not even the magnificent Ronald Reagan. We and they all have warts.

But we do want to have a candidate with at least an actual CONSERVATIVE record and not an out and out liberal progressive RINO. So let's compare their records and their actual conservative accomplishments but not try to destroy them personally.

God bless and may the best CONSERVATIVE be our nominee.

[Nonstatist]

I’m sure Santorum is a perfectly nice guy. This just isnt a nice guy election. Newt is the most fearless guy to run for the white house since Reagan. He knows how to fight and does not need time to train and get up to speed

I would say the other way around. Gingrich has too much baggage, IMO. After he gets done savaging Romney with ads, he ought to drop out and leave the field to Santorum.

One on one Santorum can beat Romney. We have to clear the field for him. He's the last one standing.

[lonestar]

In that you are very much like Mr. Servo! As you have demonstrated amply on this thread! {^)

So, you're calling me a "jackass" as well?

Mr. Servo and I have been called a jackass by a hypocrit.

ROFLOL!

[Kartographer]

No problem.

[BuckeyeTexan]

(Courtesy ping to JR. No intervention requested.)

Please, FRiends - in no particular order. I am asking you to drop the antagonism here and now. Let’s put it behind us. All three of you are valued FReepers, IMHO.

There has been significant animosity amongst Palin & Perry supporters for quite a while now. The vitriol, taunting, and personal attacks were slung by both groups. It has escalated to shameful levels.

It’s pointless to examine which group was on the receiving end of the worst vitriol. There will be no meeting of the minds in that regard. Both sides are right and wrong.

Dredging up posting histories serves only to rub salt in wounds that have not yet fully healed. It doesn’t matter who started it. All that matters now is that both sides put an end to the discord.

Please consider this request even though it means setting aside one’s pride and not having the last word.

Our focus must be to defeat Romney and Obama. As Jim has said, promote your first choice candidate and don’t denegrate other candidates or their supporters. Leave the vitriol to the liberals who have perfected it.

Please forgive my butting into a conversation that didn’t concern me.

FRegards,
Tex

[Kartographer]

My error is seems is forgetting that:

"The truth is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution."

[bopdowah]

Newt is pretty fast on his feet. Did you see this exchange at one of the recent debates? Impressive!

“I spent my life in the private sector,” Romney said. “I understand how the economy works. I believe for Americans to say goodbye to President Obama and elect a Republican; they need to have confidence the person they’re electing knows how to make this economy work again and create jobs for the American middle class.”

Shrewd as ever, Gingrich responded “Let’s be candid, the only reason you didn’t become a career politician is you lost to Teddy Kennedy in 1994.”

[lonestar]

(Courtesy ping to JR. No intervention requested.)

Windflier and Finny were doing exactly what JR asked to stop.

I am guilty of responding...to irrelevant but annoying people.

Age hath its privilege. LOL!

[VanDeKoik]

All of these guys have baggage. A man that thinks he has no baggage is always the one that travels with a steamer trunk.

Gingrich can handle what comes up at him. He is not a dainty flower. Being in congress, and in the political arena in various capacities, he’s been there, done that, got the T-shirt...and used it to wipe the blood off his face so he can see which person needs to have their face torn off.

Santorum is an unknown quantity with too many people projecting that he either has no baggage, and the political tenacity to take fire for whatever may come up. He lost his last race badly. For a guy running for the WH, you have to have the political genius of a Nixon to lose a previous race, and then beat a field like we have today. Especially with ultra-establishment Romney.

[BuckeyeTexan]

No, your error is that you denegrated all Texans as being coddlers of illegal aliens and accused us of valuing “cheap labor” over national security.

There was no “truth” in what you said. It was a baseless and unnecessary attack on Texans in general.

Your problem should be with Rick Perry not Texans in general. Most Texans, including myself, want the border secured because the illegals are costing Texans a fortune in welfare and healthcare expenditures.

[Windflier]

Please, FRiends - in no particular order. I am asking you to drop the antagonism here and now.

Tex, I've been trying to go my way in peace for three posts running, but lonestar won't have it.

It's a completely silly exchange, and I'm trying my hardest to drop it. Thanks for your concern. I don't mind the intervention.

[Windflier]

Great post, Finny!

Romney is positioned to pull the biggest liberal coup ever: to get "true conservatives" to vote for an anti-conservative agenda simply because the candidate has an "R" after his name.

[Windflier]

Well said! Bravo! *standing on chair whistling and cheering*

Aw geez, Finny. Yer makin' me blush :-)

Thank you!

[hocndoc]

Pure supposition.

[mckenzie7]

What we REALLY need to be worrying about is how to split up Paul’s base. I don't think his base is real. In polls, his base is a bunch of spam monkeys. In Iowa and soon to be other primaries/caucuses, his base is cross-over liberal voters.

My theory: His numbers are fake.

I have felt that all along. It made me think of Rush telling listeners to cross over in the primaries and vote for Hillary.

They are a bunch of Obots trying to skew the Republican ticket!

[CincyRichieRich]

Can you say Obama would do this?

---

This is an inane, intellectually insulting argument. 3rd party, whether libertarian or not would put Obama back in power. That death knell to USA would be on you nad others like your shoulders. We have proof of what Obama does and will do; we have conjecture on what you THINK Romney would do.

[Norm Lenhart]

I agree. It is supposition. I “suppose” that if one was more concerned with actual documented and repeated history rather than ignoring it just to be contrarian, it would make sense.

I further “suppose” that for some reason I cannot fathom, you think Democrats are gonna play nice with a man who could, if elected and keeps to his promises, gut their powerbase of illegals and ignore the media that supports it.

Now if this is not the case, please explain your ‘supposition’ comment because I must have missed your actual intent.

[hocndoc]

You sure do fear those big, bad Democrats. They’re not all powerful, they can’t do the things you say they can if the Republicans don’t go along.

In fact, our problem would never be President Perry. It would be spineless Republicans who cave to the Dems.

[Post Toasties]

I’ve consciously avoided saying anything very critical about any of the Republican candidates, other than I didn’t prefer some such as Romney.

[Nonstatist]

Santorum is an unknown quantity with too many people projecting that he either has no baggage, and the political tenacity to take fire for whatever may come up.. He lost his last race badly.

So did Newt, he was voted out of his leadersip position in '98, after screwing up rather famously by overplaying his hand..

For a guy running for the WH, you have to have the political genius of a Nixon to lose a previous race, and then beat a field like we have today. Especially with ultra-establishment Romney.

IMO, you are overstating if you are talking about Sentaurum. He's fairly unknown in the general public and doesent have the massive negative public baggage Newt has, nor the unusually public evidence of personal hubris

Sorry, but Santorum can beat Romney one on one, and he's a "fresh" face that can win in the Fall. IMO.

[StAnDeliver]

"Don't know how true it is, but someone upthread just said that three of Romney's ex-staffers went to work for Rubio, the moment he showed up to take his Senate seat. I think that's disturbing."

RCP/Time, Jan. 4, 2011:

"Florida Sen.-elect Marco Rubio announced his top staff, which included three former Romney campaign hands. Sally Canfield, who served as Romney's policy adviser, will be Rubio's legislative director and chief policy adviser; Joe Pounder, who was in charge of rapid response for Romney, will be Rubio's communications director; and Alex Burgos, who directed specialty media for Romney, will serve as director of media affairs for Rubio."