Posted on 01/26/2012 5:00:02 AM PST by Jerrybob
I think there is going to be a big political reward for anyone who can engage the vast mass of people in the middle, the undecideds, independants and disaffected.
Remember that the last person who managed to do those things was crucified for his troubles, so the corollory for a Republican Conservative is clear. Even absolute perfection will be insufficient.
I heard her last “personal massager” tried to kill itself and now prefers men.
OUCH!!!
The only question that remains is whether freeper "outrage" with her will last this time, or whether all be forgiven and a bunch of conservatives here will rush out to buy her next book on "conservative values" and stand in her autograph line drooling.
>> Obviously Coulter dislikes Newt Gingrich personally and is probably acquainted with him. <<
Heh. Can't really fault Ann for that, because I guess the same situation applies with me. I was "on the fence" about Newt til I met the man in person. Since then, I've learned more about his past that gives me even more pause.
>> Ann is being consistent in holding Gingrich to the same standards to which she held Clinton and has found Gingrich lacking. By hitching their wagons to Gingrich, conservatives do give up the high ground on issues relating to marital fidelity and trust (not even getting into the Fannie Mae and ethics stuff) and whether foibles in those areas DO impact eligibility to hold high office. The mantra of Democrats during the Clinton scandals was “we don’t care what he did in his private life as long as he pushes for the issues important to us.” That’s pretty much become the mantra of Gingrich supporters. <<
You make a good point, and that argument about Gingrich is a perfectly valid reason to oppose him. Never-the-less, Ann's support of Romney is indefensible. She can't make the case that Romney is "more conservative" than Newt, but insists he is anyway. That's clear dishonesty on her part, IMO.
I agree her actions in backing Presidential candidates has been consistent (and she hasn't "flip flopped" no matter how much her fans here claim they are "shocked" and try to make that case), but what I question is whether her actions were ever conservative in the first place.
>> As for Romney, she’s bought into the false belief that he’s the only Republican running who can defeat Obama. She supports Mitt simply because he’s the “best situated”, non-Newt candidate. She can’t really defend Mitt’s record and it makes her mad that she is forced into that role. <<
I get a sense that's also her reasoning, she knows deep down this guy's record is indefensible so she hates having to try. Some conservative talk show host (I forgot which) tried to back her into a corner on this in 2009 and she got irate and changed the topic to her favorite subject, touting one of her books. (with Ann, it's always about buying her book. Ironically, that also seems to be the case with Newt prior to his presidential run)
Most of the establishment conservatives who are backing Mitt do the same. My Republican township chairman is a Mitt delegate and basically admitted he didn't like doing so because he'll have a reputation around Illinois for backing "conservative lite" after endorsing Romney in 2012 and Dillard in 2010, but saw no other option since the rest of the GOP field is a bunch of lightweights. I'm sure since he's a local GOP leader in Cook County, he was being heavily pressured to back Mitt. His personal endorsement doesn't mean the township as a whole will endorse Mitt, we have a slating session on Feb. 8. But since you need a 60% vote to endorse a candidate in the primary, my guess is we'll officially be backing no one for President despite most of the room being anti-Mitt. (that was the case for the US Senate race endorsement in 2010 as well). Could be worse... as he says... "we're conservatives here, not Kirk & Topinka people like some Republican organizations" So, he's backing closet RINOs instead of openly liberal Republicans. Ugh.
Doesn't matter anyway, here in Illinois's 1st Congressional district, we have a solid slate of Santorum delegates to go up against the "GOP leaders" on Mitt's slate. Leading our delegation is Eric Wallace in IL-1, the man who SHOULD have been our conservative choice for US Senate before foolish conservatives threw him overboard in favor of Pat Hughes last year.
Fair question. I simply think we should strive to act like adults and look at the candidates, realize none will be 100% exactly what we want. I don’t support Mitt, but my post wasn’t about who I support, only the tone of the posters. We can do this without sounding like small children. That’s the domain of the other side.
I think people do tend to surround themselves with like minded people. It’s a problem if you don’t hear what others are saying because then you are really surprised later.
Newt went to Emory and Tulane. I’m sick and tired of Ivy Leaguers. THEY are the ones that have this globalist one-party strategy. It’s like both Bush and Kerry being members of Skull & Bones. I don’t like those secret relationships. Probably a bunch of Masons too.
Mitt went to BRIGHAM YOUNG and then to Harvard Law, just like that mess up in there.
Endorsing is one thing, what “the establishment”, which includes Andy Coulter is doing to Newt is dispicable IMO.
I disagree. Newt’s record, baggage, and abrasive personality is fair game. If anything was despicable, I’d say it’s the smear job she did on John Roberts a long time ago, using a scorched earth campaign to insist he was a RINO and Souter clone without a shred of evidence. I parted ways with her after that.
DR thorne? dr demento...(along with the other clowns here who are dissin annie with other ad homonim nutziness.) i’m wondering if you dingbats can read and comprehend....
Clearly ann has the right idea...to win we must win the Independents Mitt scares them less than Newt...she intelligently makes 2 other crucial arguements...
There are 2 issues CRUCIAL ONES... that if the right loses on them ....they cannot be undone.....the question becomes which candidate has the best stance on these 2 issues
1. OBAMACARE...if it is allowed to go forth and people get used to some of the ‘treats’ it contains...then it cannot and will not be overturned AND AMERICA WILL FOREVER BE CONDEMEND TO GO DOWN THE SOCIALIST PATH......people simply will not let go of their treats...therefore we must back the man most likely to deep six obamacare....on Mitts website he pledges on his first day in office to write immediate waivers to each of the 50 states thereby rendering it a non starter then he pledges to work for it’s repeal.
2. Immigration ....if amnesty in any form goes forth its just a matter of time before America becomes CALIFORNIA...again it is something that cannot be undone AND WILL FOREVER CHANCE AMERICA... if allowed to go forth....Newt has some crazy mixed up red card guest worker scheme that will fade into general amnesty soon after it’s clumsyness is initiated and AMERICAA WILL BECOME CALIFORNIA..again it will not be able to be undone...
3. Ann points out that Mitt does show wome willingness to be infulenced and listen to other conservative thought and with our control of both houses it will be not a difficult thing to bring him around to conplete conservative compliance...
DID THESE THINGS OCCUR TO ANY OF YOU WACKo ANN NAYSAYERS AT ALL? SHE’S CLEARLY ARTICULATED THEM IN PRINT AND ON HER TV APPEARANCES...WTF....is WRONG WITH YOU WRONGOS?
She’s not a Conservative team player anyway its looked at.
She’s not a Conservative team player anyway its looked at.
I’ve been saying that for years, and used to get flamed for it. The last straw for me was when she announced she’d campaign for the RAT nominee if Republican candidate was McCain. (of course, she didn’t have the guts to follow thru on that “pledge”)
I forgot about 2008 - thank you for the reminder!
Andy Coulter is a lib, period.
Two words: Arianna Huffington
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.