![](http://i.imgur.com/yym6E.jpg")
Posted on 04/26/2012 7:24:26 PM PDT by Windflier
Slight editing for punctuation, and to de-personalize the post.
Thank you, BlackElk.
p.s. I called this Part 1, because I know there will be more.
Courtesy ping.
BTTT
No matter what anyone says, even if the Republican nominee is a warm tub of sh*t, I am voting for it because AT THE VERY LEAST Romney wont have the Muslim Brotherhood licking his balls. Also WE CAN PROTEST ROMNEY AND TAKE THE NOMINATION in 2016.
EXILE OBAMA AND BE DONE WITH HIM.
Yes, well said.
Romney is out of the question. I will never vote for a gay marriage enabling, baby killing socialist who thinks that he is a God entitled to rule his own planet. And that wrecking America is just a step along that privileged path.
What will you do when Sarah endorses Romney?
Here are some thoughts I posted about Romney, about a week ago:
For me, standing up to the tyranny that now besets us, is more than just lofty rhetoric. I can trace my direct lineage back to an American who fired at the British in anger during the Revolutionary War.
Since his time, a lot of my fathers have shed blood, or have sacrificed greatly, to stand guard over this fragile republic. What sort of son would I be if I meekly accepted the left’s terms of surrender in my day? I’m not standing in harm’s way with a rifle in my hand, like so many of them did.
No - I’m armed with only a ballot, by whose markings my fathers shall judge me. I would not even think of sullying their honor by giving my solemn vote to a man and a party, who have essentially gone into abject Treason against the very things my forefathers fought and bled for.
And where is the conservative candidate, the heir of Ronaldus Magnus? Who is and has been laying a groundwork for gaining the support of those of us conservatives? Will it be Perry, Santorum, Palin, Gingrich? Reagan winning the nomination in 1980 was not because he began his quest in 1978, but because he began it over a decade earlier. I voted for Newt in the primary, but I don’t know if he will persevere as Reagan did, and I’ve been a Newt supporter for many years.
I am not posting this question as sarcasm, but because I am truly looking for an answer and a conservative candidate. Who is the conservative out there whom I’m overlooking?
Thank you Windflier. I have been reading duplicate posts today from the bailers and it’s heartening to hear from someone else who has conscience driven core principles that are not negotiable.
I will detest Romney as much as I do today. Others can do as they wish, but I will not promote him, and I will not vote for him.
Perhaps it's you.
Dittos, Mary. Core principles ought to be non-negotiable, and well worth fighting for. Our forefathers certainly thought so, and so do I.
“I’m armed with only a ballot, by whose markings my fathers shall judge me. I would not even think of sullying their honor by giving my solemn vote to a man and a party, who have essentially gone into abject Treason against the very things my forefathers fought and bled for.”
A vote is a civic sacrament, not choosing between team jerseys.
So essentially you will vote for Obama by throwing your vote away?
I admire Sarah greatly. "When" she endorse Mitt, I will just say fine and promptly ignore it.
No one or no thing on this Earth will ever get me to cast a vote for vile Mitt. Mitt and his evil staff when out of their way to utterly destroy Conservatives.
Mitt is die-hard Statist. He can never honestly debate a Conservative.
Mitt would only delay the inevitable. The economy can never properly recover under Mitt because his 50plus point platform and his liberal records clearly illustrates that he is incapable of viewing government as a necessary evil.
So, in three years when most people are still miserable, the MSM and the RATs will be screaming that the "hard-right" Conservative policies of Mitt are failing.
The Conservatives will be shut-out throughout his term because he will align with the RATs and RINOs. Mitt has a natural antithesis towards Conservatives.
With the new RAT voters, courtesy of Mitt's love of Amnesty, the RATs will walk into the White House in 2016 and complete the destruction of our Liberties.
In summary, with Mitt very little positive will occur and the Conservatives will be rabidly blamed for all the ills. It's a lose lose for Conservatives and Liberty.
I think it would be ridiculous to think that Mitt will be a big improvement.
You wouldn't think you'd have to remind conservatives of that basic truism, but unfortunately, some have had their core principles scared right out of them.
I understand your notion that we may as well let Obama “own this”
But do you think it is wise to give him a second term?
If you think he has been bad so far, just wait till he is a lame duck.
He will go scorched earth on us.
He wont even pretend to get along.
I’m too old to begin a political career and don’t have the bellie fire for it.
But who out there is the person who will pick up the mantel of conservatism? We must however, make sure that we support and elect conservative candidates to the house and senate. And into local and state offices.
A vote for Romney is no different than a vote for Obama. They work for the same masters, and are working toward the same agenda.
There is no choice involved here.
That said, electing Romney does even more damage than electing Obama, because he will take the whole conservative movement down the drain with him. Obama can't do that.
In fact, with a Republican dominated congress, Obama will likely be frozen in place. They'll do no such thing to Romney, who would be the de facto head of their party. They will allow him latitude that they'd never give to Obama.
There's the hard truth of it. Cogitate on it, my man.
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.