Posted on 01/25/2012 3:14:51 PM PST by Syncro
Read More »
RE-ELECT OBAMA: VOTE NEWT!
January 25, 2012To talk with Gingrich supporters is to enter a world where words have no meaning. They denounce Mitt Romney as a candidate being pushed on them by "the Establishment" -- with "the Establishment" defined as anyone who supports Romney or doesn't support Newt.
Gingrich may have spent his entire life in Washington and be so much of an insider that, as Jon Stewart says, "when Washington gets its prostate checked, it tickles [Newt]," but he is deemed the rebellious outsider challenging "the Establishment" -- because, again, "the Establishment" is anyone who opposes Newt.
This is the sort of circular reasoning one normally associates with Democrats, people whom small-town pharmacists refer to as "drug seekers" and Ron Paul supporters.
Newtons claim Romney is a "moderate," and Gingrich the true conservative -- a feat that can be accomplished only by refusing to believe anything Romney says ... and also refusing to believe anything Gingrich says.
-- Romney's one great "flip-flop" is on abortion. (I thought the reason we argued with people about abortion was to try to get them to "flip-flop" on this issue. Sometimes it works!)
Nearly two decades ago, when Romney was trying to defeat champion desecrator of life Sen. Teddy Kennedy, he sought to remove abortion as a campaign issue by declaring that he, too, supported Roe v. Wade.
(Nonetheless, Kennedy ran a campaign commercial against him featuring a Mormon woman complaining that Romney, as a Mormon elder, had pressured her not to have an abortion, but to give the child up for adoption. Are you getting the idea that Massachusetts is different from the rest of America, readers?)
Romney changed his mind on abortion -- not when it was politically advantageous, but when it mattered. As governor of liberal, pro-choice Massachusetts, he vetoed an embryonic stem cell bill and "worked closely" with Massachusetts Citizens for Life. The president of MCL recently issued a statement saying that, "since being elected governor, Mitt Romney has had a consistent commitment to the culture of life." Read More »
I quit using Drudge. I heard about this on our local talk radio show this morning. I’ve had warnings pop up when I clicked on Drudge links from work.
> You may be right about her wanting BO to win. Therefore she can continue to take the stage and bytch about what a shape the country is in all because of the Demonrats (and RINO’s too but she won’t say that). Get a real Conservative in the White House and she’ll be diminished, imho.
I think you nailed it. I’ve been saying for the last couple of years (and taking quite a bit of heat for it on FR) that Coulter has increasingly become first and foremost an attention wh*re more interested in generating buzz for herself and flogging her books instead of espousing conservative principles. And the best chance she has to do this is if she’s got a socialist in office for easy pickins.
I think this is partly desperation as her good looks are deteriorating. Women with principle age like Margaret Thatcher, women with lack of character age like Pelousy, stuffing Botox into the face and screeching.
Coulter is sad. Sad sad sad.
Since we’re reviewing videos (ancient ones at that), let’s look at a very recent one Glenn Beck posted regarding Newt’s recent denial of his theretofore hero, FDR, whom he said was the best president of the 20th century:
Let’s face it, Newt is not only an unelectable hothead, but a closet progressive.
I am waiting for the punchline.
I agree! :)
Coulter is against homosexual marriage.
When she spoke to GOProud she convinced them that it was a bad idea, and they took it off of their agenda.
Supporting Romney is anathema to that position.
The single most important issue to me this election is the repeal of Obamacare. According to Norm, I don’t even need to vote if Mitt gets the nomination.
How’s that strike you Ann?
“I hope those who bought her books will stop it.”
In all honesty her treatment of conservatives makes me rather sad. I enjoyed her past books and enjoyed being able to reward her for writing them. I will never buy another book by her, unless she does an about face and apologizes profusely and with honest retribution.
I am doubtful that she will apologize, so I will use my disposable income on other authors.
LOL, she hardly gave a full-throated invective against gay marriage, which she always does against everything she's really against. The implication in her remarks is to quiet down about it "for now." That makes it easier to sneak it through the courts like happened in Massachusetts under Governor Mitt Romney. The more people raise the gay marriage agenda, the more the public does everything they can to try to stop it, including influencing the courts, amending the constitution, etc.
Well in that case do the right thing and endorse homosexual marriage.
There are no gay homosexuals, they are homosexuals period.
Let's not buy into their stealing a perfectly good word and using it to describe a doomed lifestyle.
Calling them gay is supporting their lifestyle.
Using your logic, I guess the best thing for you to do is approve of homosexual marriage, that’s the path to keeping it from multiplying in your view it seems.
Thank you.
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.