Posted on 03/19/2012 11:23:44 AM PDT by Fred
Rick Santorum could be the worst thing to happen to the GOP ever. Worse even than George W. Bush. And thats saying a lot. Bush did so much damage to the GOP brand, he almost destroyed the party forever. It was George Bush who brought us Barack Obama. Few Americans voted for Obama, they just voted for ABB (Anyone But Bush).
Now the GOP has a golden opportunity. Obama has wrecked the U.S. economy from sea to shining sea. He has turned off voters by the millions. By historical standards, based on the current disastrous economic and unemployment numbers, Obama is virtually unelectable. Obama is a magician. He has made voters forget Bush in only three years. That's a pretty darn amazing trick.
The proof is in the recent polls. This has been perhaps the worst month for the GOP in modern political history. The message is no longer jobs, rising gas prices, chronic long-term unemployment, or crumbling real estate.
The message is about womens health, the right to use contraception, Planned Parenthood funding, Rush Limbaughs use of a crude term to describe a young female law student, and whether Republicans like sex, or hate women. It just doesnt get any worse than this. And in recent polls, Mitt Romney is leading President Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
How do you think Romney is trustworthy on social issues? He’s been pro-abortion and not only pro-”gay” rights but seriously enthusiastic about the homo agenda. I loathe Romney and will never vote for him. I’ll vote for Santorum if he’s the candidate, which I doubt he will be. He’s not a fighter and his voting record is not good at all in the fiscal/huge gov’t department. Way too compromising. You know that quote from “Conan the Barbarian”? Something about smashing the enemy, driving them in front, and hearing the wailing of their women? That’s what I want.
well I do not know about any of the other stuff, but I wager a guess that Harriet Miers was to draw fire away from the ultimate nominee, Roberts, who is fan double tastic and who never would have made it had the legislators not been worn down from bashing Harriet. The whole kabuki theater was a real treat to watch.
I’ll take either Santorum or Newt. Can’t STAND Romney.
I agree. (Though it will need to take an amendment for abortion.)
As long as we give the government power over marriage, they have power over marriage.
If you don’t like it, take the power over marriage away from the federal government and return it back where it belongs.
That’s what so many fail to realize.
“As long as we give the government power over marriage, they have power over marriage. If you dont like it, take the power over marriage away from the federal government and return it back where it belongs. Thats what so many fail to realize.”
Boom! Droppin knowledge!
And how this "send it back to the states" argument of yours work when it was attempted with the slavery issue, Senator Stephen A. Douglas? Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Slavery was dying out by the time of the civil war. So, by handing back to the states, the problem was solving itself. Had we kept to that, instead of having our federal government screw around with the matter, there would have been no more slavery... *AND* no civil war.
And thus, no concept of an income tax or a powerful federal government.
Once again, a good example of how federalizing matters always makes them worse; no matter how noble the intent or good the cause.
But since you believe that "federalizing matters always makes them worse; no matter how noble the intent or good the cause", would you support the repeal of the 2nd amendment and "sending it back to the states" to determine for themselves whether or not the citizenry in those states are allowed to have guns? States rights, right?
Constitutional amendments are ratified by the states. Which means the states agree with them. Why would you remove an amendment, that was agreed on by the states, as an example of states rights?
If anything, that's an example of statism.
Really? What about all the "states rights!!!" freepers demanding the repeal of the 17th amendment? Do you agree with them? Last time I checked, it was ratified by the states, which means the states themselves voluntarily agreed to give up their right to appoint U.S. Senators. Do you think the repeal of the 17th would be an example of statism? Or do you think it would a victory for "states right!!!" If it's the latter, how do you explain your conflicting beliefs that repeal of the 2nd would be "statism"?
What about all the "states rights!!!" freepers demanding the repeal of the 17th amendment? Do you agree with them? Last time I checked, it was ratified by the states, which means the states themselves voluntarily agreed to give up their right to appoint U.S. Senators.
Yes, they did. And if the states want to repeal it, then it should be repealed by the states. As for those freepers (myself included), we think the 17th Amendment was a bad idea and want it repealed. So, we work to get it repealed. As it's a Constitutional amendment, there will have to be another amendment to repeal it, a la Prohibition.
Do you think the repeal of the 17th would be an example of statism? Or do you think it would a victory for "states right!!!
So the answer to that would depend on *HOW* it was repealed. Note that... *HOW* it was repealed (see how the process matters?) If the President or Congress just enacted an Executive Order or law annulling it, that would violate the Constitution... and the rights of the states. If, on the other hand, a new Amendment was added to the Constitution repealing it, then that would be great.
Same for the 2nd Amendment. If a 2/3rds majority of states want it repealed (G-d, I hope not!), then they can. Whereas all these federal gun laws that try to do so via legislation violate states rights.
That process is what separates America from the tinpot dictatorships around the world. For we are supposed to be a nation ruled by *LAW*, not by *PEOPLE*. And our supreme law of the land is the Constitution... and we better d#$n well follow it.
EVEN WHEN IT'S NOT TO OUR CONVENIENCE!!!
Ah, got it. Passing 2nd amendment good. Passing human life amendment BAD:
Guaranteed national right to own a gun > Guaranteed national right to life
Needless to say, I disagree with your priorities.
???
You make no sense.
Where does acknowledging that if 2/3rd of our states want to repeal the 2nd Amendment... equal that I support it?
Seriously, now. That is straight out of the Ayers handbook.
In essence, you are saying that recognizing the Constitution of the United States is something you reject.
Obama... is that you in disguise?
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.