Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kaslin

Well guess she goes for Romney because an endorsement for the looser Santorum is a vote for Romney. Sometimes one has to select the lesser of the two evils. Michelle screwed up in spite of all her raving. I’m done with her.


5 posted on 01/30/2012 8:27:14 AM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Logical me

“Well guess she goes for Romney because an endorsement for the looser Santorum is a vote for Romney.”


Wait, so Santorum is more loose than Romney? Do you mean in the sexual sense? Because I’m sure that Newt has both of them beat in that category.

Oh, you meant “loser.” Funny way to describe someone with as many accomplishments as Rick Santorum.

But enough 5th-grade spelling lessons. Someone who supports Santorum is supporting Santorum, period. If Michelle Malkin wished to support Mitt Romney, she would have entitled her piece “For Romney.” And the same goes for me. I didn’t see Newt supporters rallying around Santorum when it was clear that only the could stop Romney from winning Iowa, and I fail to see how it makes me a bad conservative for me to support Santorum, whom I happen to believe is preferable to Newt. If we can’t support our preferred candidate in the primary, why have primaries in the first place?


46 posted on 01/30/2012 10:24:36 AM PST by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll protect your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson