works for me...Seriously.
If Romney is the Nominee, then:
- Newt, Palin, and West should go into a room
- Two emerge as the ticket for a new conservative party
- All 3 campaign
The Whigs are dead, are they not? Why not the current “Republican Party”??
GRAND IDEA!
works for me...As Barry Obama would say, it's been 160 years, it's time for a change!
I can’t vote for Romney. I simply can’t. There was a time when I didn’t care about Romney one way or another, being under his governorship as a Massachusetts resident seemed an improvement over some before and after him. But no longer. I am unwilling to compromise any more.
And I can’t vote for Scott Brown either.
Or politicians like them.
I am sick and tired of the GOP presenting us with choices like McCain and Dole. It gives us presidencies like Clinton and Obama.
Someone has this strange idea that liberalism is a fence that can be straddled, and some of the elements of it can be picked and chosen, while the conservative ideas can be surrendered to make room for them, and that in the end, liberals are attracted and conservatives are satisfied.
IT DOES NOT WORK.
Any “conservative” who crosses the aisle to get elected by embracing liberal ideas has two things happen to him:
First, he is ridiculed, stabbed in the back and has his extended hand cut off by liberals he sides with, because even people as morally corrupt as liberals easily recognize and hate traitors, and treat them with the contempt they deserve. Think of how Benedict Arnold was treated by the British. He tried to sell his country for a bag of silver, but the British wanted nothing to do with him after he went over to their side.
Second, they end up using future elections because they no longer have a leg to stand on, and voters looking for handouts, when given a choice between a piker and professional, will always choose the professional liberal. Trying to out-liberal a liberal is a recipe for Republican failure, since you will no longer be able to stand by the conservative principles you once held (remember “No New Taxes”) and the liberals will be much more efficient at getting and distributing pork, because they have more experience without the annoying principles holding them back. Kind of the equivalent of arguing with an idiot...they bring you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
For a long time, I treated politics as a “lesser of two evils” type of thing, and was perfectly content with the logic of voting for the candidate who wouldn’t do as much damage as the other, and that was almost always the Republican candidate.
I have come to the realization in the last several years, particularly with the election of Scott Brown in my state, that it doesn’t work.
Voting for a candidate who is not quite as liberal as another simply means the same destructive and corrosive liberal agenda will take a little longer to be effected, but it will be effected just the same.
And the worst part of it is, that it will happen with the imprimatur of Republicans. Whatever happens, liberals will point to the “bipartisanship” of whatever evil it is they push, and say “Hey, you voted for this guy and he voted for (Insert liberal cause here: nationalized healthcare, homosexuals in the military, raising taxes, etc) so this is what people want and it is what we are going to do.”
To me, a knife in the chest from an enemy I recognize as such is preferable to a knife in the back from a supposed ally.
Liberalism, like government, is a one way ratchet. Liberal polices are enacted, and are never reversed. Governments expand but never, ever shrink. And in the end, we still get to the same destination, it just takes a little bit longer is all.
I am not doing it any more.