ola Veritas wrote:
Jim...whenever someone takes a moral, principled stand, verses a pragmatic one, they will be persecuted for it. That just makes you a good guy!
IF someone calls me a “purist” for having a basic set of reasonable standards and sticking to them....then I know they are NOT truly conservative...they are only conveinently so.
You are taking a stand when all the others are selling out to Romney’s nonsense. They do this because of fear of Obama. Well, common sense tells one that you don’t fight wrong with wrong. Obama is wrong and Romney is wrong. We don’t have to sell folks on Obama being wrong....it is self evident. However, I find it extremely disturbing that folks cannot see that Romney does not meet minimal standards of acceptability. To vote for him would be to violate one’s personal standards of morality and ethics. At least for a sensible person...like you Jim.”
Well, those of us who not going to sit out this election and are going to seize the opportunity to vote for Romney/Ryan, are also taking a moral and principled stand by ridding this beloved nation of the most radical and dangerous administration this country has ever seen, and WE are being persecuted for it.
And for you to equate the Romney/Ryan ticket as evil as that Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Muslim, illegal alien, thug in the White House, including his out-of-control Justice Department that is superseding states rights and MURDERING American citizens, tells me that YOU are not a real conservative.
By the way, everyone from Sarah Palin to Rush Limbaugh has been called a RINO on this website, so who is a “pure” conservative?
“Well, those of us who not going to sit out this election and are going to seize the opportunity to vote for Romney/Ryan, are also taking a moral and principled stand by ridding this beloved nation of the most radical and dangerous administration this country has ever seen, and WE are being persecuted for it.”
No sir, you are taking a “pragmatic” stand; not a moral one. You are trying to convince yourself and others, that supporting slime like Romney (I leave Ryan out of this) is better than four more years of Obama. Well, that means that pro-life, blocking the homosexual agenda, stopping big government statism don’t really matter to you...you just want to be rid of Obama. With Romney...ALL those things..abortion, homosexual agenda, etc. will continue and a rubber stamp GOP congress that votes based upon “party loyalty” first. You may get your wish and get a temporary warm and fuzzy feeling to remove Obama (who wouldn’t really), but the long term pain that will result will give you serious buyer’s remorse later. You will have replaced a liberal with a liberal.
The ONLY persons that will, long term, benefit from a Romney victory are the GOP establishment and the Salt Lake City Mafia.
Well, I’m not going to vote for a known gun-grabbing, abortionist/homosexualist lying statist no matter what Palin or Limbaugh say or do. But that’s just me. One man, one vote. If Romney needs my vote to win, sorry, he lost.
This is the kind of CRAP that needs to stop.
Those of us who will NOT vote for Romney are not being rude to those of you who will. Yet we get posts like the above.
If you want to vote for Romney, go ahead. I won't try to talk you out of it, I won't ridicule you for it. I won't hold it against you in any way.
There is no reason for the pro Romney crowd to post their snide crap like what you just did. And yours was just a minor dig compared to some of the stuff I have read from the Romney camp.
Not voting for Romney does not mean we are staying home. It does not mean we are not voting. We just are not voting for Romney. Of course YOU knew that Southnsoul, didn't you?
Don't you love the people who pompously start by firing up the straw man "Well, those of us who are not going to stay home"? [COBOL2Java, post #100]
Pompous indeed. Straw man? Yup.
Elitist. Assumptionist.
Allow me to state the obvious:
(a) There's more races on a November ballot -- along with key issues -- than POTUS
(b) There'll be likely more "Virgil Goode" and "Tom Hoefling" votes (true conservative votes) than "stay home" conservative voters...
And if some of you are going to don your "third party can't win" pulpit mantras, let's see your level of consistency on that one. Where have you been in telling conservatives in about 15 states that NO conservative or RINO can win in those states? (Left Coast; New England; IL; D.C. area aside from Virginia) Somehow that doesn't stop Romney from getting votes in those states, and we don't see you preaching that crap @ Romney blue-state voters...Why not?
Romneyites: JimRob is in CA...how oft' have you preached to him that Romney can't win in that state, so why vote for somebody who can't collect electoral votes?
What's "funny" about that mantra is -- taken to its extreme -- if you are ONLY to vote for the guy who can take a given state -- well, that means conservatives would HAVE to vote for Obama in the blue states...and some maintain with a LOT of evidence that it wouldn't be much worse than his "twin," the Mythster.
Blue-staters inside and outside FR: Vote third party (Goode/Hoefling) Romney can't win those states, anyway.
Red-staters within FR: Vote third-party (Goode/Hoefling) Obama can't win those states, anyway.
Purple-staters within FR: Keep monitoring the polls up thru late October. If it shifts more strongly to Romney, he won't need your vote; If it shifts more strongly to Obama, one more vote down the toilet won't help Romney. If it's neck and neck up to the end, pray for direction...It's to Him you will ultimately have to be accountable unto...and don't be afraid to stick to your principle to never vote for a "pro-abort" if you have that...
Remember... one day somebody will pressure you into voting for either a type like THE Anti-Christ...who could be running vs. a reincarnated Hitler...Believe me, the "anti-opposing candidate" reasons to vote vs. one or the other of those guys would be hefty...
But the "anti" vote goes both ways...we don't support people who oppose the ban on the Boy Scouts...who become socialist healthcare pioneers...and who support the "offing" of offspring just because they adhere to the euphemism of "choice"...and this year we have one candidate doing that in sheep's clothing...based upon all the pro-abort things Romney did/said in 2005-2007 after his alleged "pro-life" altarcall in late 2004.
tells me that YOU are not a real conservative.
***In one respect you are right. Right now we are in the middle of an attempted redefenition of what it means to be conservative. On one side are jackasses like you who want us to vote for a lying, babykilling statist. On the other side are principled people who refuse to give up their principles. This redefinition wasn’t our idea; it was the GOP’s, and the Mainstream Media’s.
God help us if you succeed. God help Free Republic if you do.