Posted on 03/22/2012 7:07:28 PM PDT by Southnsoul
A Romney win means not only that the country supports Socialism, but that both major political parties support socialism.
The Problem as I see it with Romney is that he will be such a mediocre President that even if he does win he will be so middle of the road as to “not upset the apple cart” that the economy will not bloom and then in 4 years it will assure that the democrats take back power on the whole meme that the “economy didn’t recover”.
Not to mention any GOP president is going to be so damned hated no matter how “moderate” they are. Mittens will get so damned gun shy that he will be ineffective and the MSM and the Democrat controlled media will smell blood and keep attacking him even as he retreats and this will paralyze him to what needs to be done to restore the economy and defuse all of Obama’s horrible regulatory actions.
Newt is going to be hated like hell anyways and HE KNOWS THAT, but he also knows that he will have the people who put him there behind even if the Media doesn’t paint it that way every night at 5:00pm.
So therefore, Newt (who thrives on antagonism instead of flinching from it) will take the bold measures to recover the economy despite being thrashed every night on the MSM news channels. In Four years the MSM will be flabbergasted like their were on election night in 1984, because the man on the street will notice the economy improvement.
Mitt is a Flincher, Newt is a Clincher
Definition of a Clincher:
a decisive fact, argument, act, or remark
Definition of a Flincher:
to withdraw or shrink from or as if from pain
We are so SOL if Either Mittens gets in or Barry gets a second term.
Mittens would only slow things down and then in four years the GOP would be blamed so much but with little to show we would still be in an economic malaise the likes of Carter’s worst dreams. This would GUARANTEE a Democrat Victory over the house the senate and even the presidency in 2016. They would not be pulling any punches as they would run someone that would make Obama look like a middle of the road moderate. Because they know they would have a very good chance of winning. Not to mention the class warfare game that could be played to Bolshevik conclusion during that election if we get Romney and mediocre performance out of him which is very much likely.
Of course Obama winning would be a very much “nothing to lose” second term that would see him likely either completely destroying the economy so badly that they play the game of “Destroy and Support” in that they would destroy the economy and then support the people as the “great savior” thus ensuring either “Glorious Revolution” or the mass construction project of making millions more so dependent that they will have a permanent grip on power that would only come undone with Blood sweat and tears, but mostly Blood and Tears.
ABO and ABR, because we really need Newt or maybe Santorum if we get desperate, heck I would even take, heaven forbid (I can’t believe I am saying this), Ron Paul over Romney for the reasons above.
So I repeat once more: Newt is the Clincher, and Mitt is the Flincher.
You do understand that if Romney becomes the nominee he will swing to the left of Obama and you will never see his liberal butt again don’t you?
“An Obama win says that the country supports Socialism.”
“A Romney win means not only that the country supports Socialism, but that both major political parties support socialism.”
Yes.
I choose to not vote for empty suit politicians with records that support gun control, socialized healthcare, Planned Parenthood, global warming, cap & trade, suppression of religious freedoms, higher gas prices, govt. bailouts, class warfare, liberal judges, and the status quo on the broken tax system. Unfortunately that eliminates both Zero and Romney.
I’d rather vote 3rd party than be complicit in what Obama and Obama-light want to do to this country.
Furthermore I think the GOP losership will mindlessly embrace the drivel that comes from RINOmny (which will be the same as Zero’s). That will lead to an even faster decay of the country. With a split govt., there is a chance the GOP losership can use the one testicle that they share to oppose the same stuff from Zero due to partisanship.
Folks, we will not have the votes to override a Veto, if Obama wins.
Obamacare is ALREADY law, and if SCOTUS does not strike down Obamacare, we are stuck with it.
I would much prefer Gingrich or Santorum -—
But it is irresponsible and suicidal to do anything which might give Obama 4 more years.
We are STUCK with Obamacare if Obama wins.
And yes, the economy maters,. We can't fight for the prolife cause, the 2nd Amendment cause, our 1st Amendment rights or anything else, very effectively, if Obama is allowed to put us all on the dole.
Folks, we will not have the votes to override a Veto, if Obama wins.
Obamacare is ALREADY law, and if SCOTUS does not strike down Obamacare, we are stuck with it.
I would much prefer Gingrich or Santorum -—
But it is irresponsible and suicidal to do anything which might give Obama 4 more years.
We are STUCK with Obamacare if Obama wins.
And yes, the economy mstters,. We can't fight for the prolife cause, the 2nd Amendment cause, our 1st Amendment rights or anything else, very effectively, if Obama is allowed to put us all on the dole.
Yeah, when he cuddled up to Nancy Pelosi on that couch, he looked like he was clinching her.
A Nuclear War pretty much makes all of our other issues seem pointless and small.
A Nuclear Weapon in the hands of terrorists will be a disaster.
Another financial melt down will be hard on the conservative cause, as it will increase the dependency level and grow the welfare state, and put us on the verger of complete societal collapse and fighting in the streets.
Romney is a liberal Republican, no doubt, but I believe that the guy is realistic about radical Islam, and that the guy has a survival instinct that Obama does not have, where our Country is concerned.
Hope you're right. But I, for one, fully expect Romney to double-cross us on the Obamacare issue.
Yes, Romney's romised to repeal Obamacare -- but sometimes with weasel words. I smell something like an immediate eecutive order to "suspend" implementation of Obamacare -- and a simultaneous request to Congress to "fix" the "problems" and make the plan "work".
At bottom, the problem is tht Romney is not trustworthy. And he is not ommitted to any conservative goals -- largely because he doesn't understand them any better than GHWB did.
That is the problem.
Do you really think that we can continue health care in the present direction? I saw a study that showed that health care would consume 100% of the GDP in my lifetime (well, maybe) at this rate. The status quo is not an option.
A Republican whose only offer is to “repeal Obamacare” with no other ideas will lose on that issue.
Romney and Foy also proposed slashing the number of SUVs in the state vehicle fleet. As one administration veteran told me this week: “It was helpful to have gas prices high when we were there because it led [Romney] to think that efficiency was sensible...
Can you imagine? He wanted state vehicles to be efficient!!!
Better four more years of Obama than this tyranny!!!
What a shocker!
I’d take GHWB in a heartbeat over Obama. He was not a bad president.
No surprise — he’s a liberal.
Romney is FOR ObamaCARE,
but he is FOR ... well, Romney.
Left of Obama!? Not possible. I like my chances of controlling a squishy Romney with bolstered numbers in the House and by winning the Senate. He will not get a Souter through 40 conservative Senators.
If you don’t vote for a candidate who has a chance of winning, you will help Obama be re-elected. Get real.
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.