Replies

@ CAWW (post 263): I respect your view about Santorum being in this race for himself, and since you're from Pennsylvania, you have better on-the-ground information than me. I don't see things the same way you do, but I'm open to being convinced. We have four years now to give Santorum the kind of national-level vetting that probably needed to be done long ago. My guess is the bottom line will be that you and I will still disagree, but at least those of us outside Pennsylvania will have more information than we did in the weeks after he won Iowa and became a national candidate.

@ OhioWFan (post 265): I need to be careful here because Free Republic has made its rules clear about no advocacy for Romney. Conscience is important to me and I don't know if I can pull the level for Romney. I still haven't yet decided what I will do this fall, and in my state, which is a swing state, my vote actually may make a significant difference so it's not as easy to cast a protest vote for the Constitution Party as it would be in a solid red or solid blue state. The 2008 election here in Missouri was so close that the presidential winner wasn't known for quite some time after the election, and the election could easily have been determined by the vote in this state, as happened in Florida, if the 2008 national vote had not been so decisively for Obama. However, if I decide to vote for Romney I won't be advocating that view here, just as I don't go into the houses of my Democratic friends and attack the Democratic Party when they've asked me not to discuss that subject in their homes.

@ Cripplecreek (post 273): I fully agree with you that Romney has won the Republican primary by winning states and parts of states that he has little if any chance of winning this fall. That is a major problem for Romney, and I think it's a clear indicator that he's headed for a disastrous defeat this fall. Regarding your congressman (post 245), he's absolutely correct that as a freshman, he will be isolated and attacked if he doesn't support Romney, which could cost him committee and subcommittee memberships and torpedo his efforts to help his constituents through legislation. That's even more true if he's in a difficult district and has to rely on campaign fundraising help from colleagues. Many of us thought 2012 would be a Republican blowout year and weren't as aggressive in local fundraising as for the presidential candidates. Now, with Romney at the head of the ticket, we could see a lot of good down-ticket Republicans lose their seats and they need every dollar they can get if they have an aggressive Democrat opponent.

@ DallasSun (post 344): Thanks for your thanks!

What I am doing, and will continue to do, is list the horrific things Barack Obama is doing and will continue to do at an even more extreme level if he's reelected.

I will continue to point out that if Obama is reelected, we will get two more SC Justices like Kagan and Sotomayor....or worse. We will have an increasingly terroristic EPA, no drilling, no fracking, no coal industry. We will have increasingly hostile actions against the free exercize of religion. We will have an increasingly worsening economy, and the punishment of small businesses and a war against the free market. We will continue to have a CinC who abhors our troops, who hates our allies and loves our enemies.

If pointing out the truth about Barack Obama gets me in trouble on a conservative forum, so be it.

I will take my chances because, deep down, I don't think any of us will be banned for hating what Barack Obama is doing to this country we love.