I am completely perplexed by the absolute hatred for Mitt Romney. He has had positions that I don’t agree with (he was for abortion but now seems to be pro life and he instituted socialized medicine in Massachusetts). Ronald Reagan was for abortion and was a Democrat before he saw the light. Reagan also increased taxes as Governor of California before becoming President and having people like Jack Kemp advise him on helping the economy by cutting taxes.
Mitt Romney may not have all the conservative positions but he is not worthy of the venom being put out there. I would much rather see Jim Robinson and this small group of folks against Romney spend some energy on our real enemies like 0bama, Axelrod, Emanuel, Reid and Pelosi than to go after Mitt Romney.
Have you met my cousin's boy?
He's gonna be President some day!
Post 1144
I agree with you, this thread kind of turned into a riot and Romney was their target. The Republicans did not have much of a lineup and they lost. President Bush draws the same animosity as Mitt Romney and I honestly don’t think there was a person on the ballot that would have done a better job than President Bush did. Certainly not McCain, and I think Thompson had shown he wasn’t up to the job (especially considering what he would have faced), I had hope for Huckabee at one time but the more I looked at him the more he reminded me of Clinton (plus he seemed unpredictable and a little strange). I thought Rudy Giuliani would have been best at dealing with the opposition and executive experience equal to any of the candidates but there were problems with some of his views and he seemed to push everyone’s buttons.
I think all this energy should be directed to influencing the direction of this country by working to derail the socialist agenda and finding candidates that work towards that end as well as rebuilding this nation. We can then rationally debate their merits as well as their performance. As far as the presidential candidates for next time, I am interested in Haley Barbour, Mark Sanford, Bob Riley, and Bobby Jindal, others are passionate about Sarah Palin. Let’s get on track and prepare for the coming challenges.
I would also like to add that I think GOP_Lady was treated quite shabbily on another thread. She appears to be a credit to this forum, it will be diminished if she, and others like her, are driven out.
Good point, kevinm13. I wasn’t a Romney supporter but I’ve been scratching my head over this irrational hatred for him. And what was the point of this thread in the first place? Seems to me all it has done is bring out a bunch of “hell ya’s” and unneeded and unproductive bickering. There are far more productive ways to advance the conservative agenda.
Well, I would much rather see Romney drop out -- and stop pro-life & conservative pretenses...because many are being taken in by them...and he's diluting the people & $ resources we'll need to expend energy on our real enemies like 0bama, Axelrod, Emanuel, Reid and Pelosi.
We don't him repeating his spoiler performance of '08.
...but now seems but now seems to be pro life...
OK, one of the reasons I said Romney's "pro-life" comments are a "pretense" stems from this comment he made just 18 months ago. I'm going to post this interview excerpt with Katie Couric...please note the bold-faced phrases (source: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/04/eveningnews/main3572685.shtml):
Couric: You said you have personal views toward abortion but felt that in the public arena, another position could exist. What is wrong with that? What's wrong with having a personal view and feeling that it's the right of individuals to make these difficult choices?
Romney: Well, what I recognized is that in a civilized society that there has to be a respect for the sanctity of life - that if you put that aside, if you say, "We're gonna start creating life and then destroying it," you're, in effect, playing God. And I think a civilized society has certain rules of conduct that it live by and one of those is to respect the sanctity of life. Another is respect in the sanctity of marriage. And…so when…I was faced with not a theoretical question of, "What do you think about abortion?" but, instead, the reality of being a governor who would sign a bill that would create life and destroy it-this was an embryonic cloning bill--I said, "I simply cannot become party to something where life would be created and then destroyed." And that made the decision for me that it was impossible to have a strong position personally opposing abortion and, at the same time, to say that we're going to have laws which permitted and permit the destruction of life throughout our society.
Couric: So are you opposed to stem cell research?
Romney: No, I'm very much in favor of stem cell research, but in a way which I believe is moral and ethical. And creating new embryos through embryo farming or through cloning, I find to be unethical and I would not pursue that course of stem cell research.
Couric: So what kind of embryos - embryos that are created for procreation and then would be discarded? Are those the ones that you feel are perfectly fine from which to cull cells for stem cell research?
Romney: Yes, those embryos that are referred to commonly as surplus embryos from in-vitro fertilization. Those embryos, I hope, could be available for adoption for people who would like to adopt embryos. But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable. It should not be made against the law. I wouldn't finance that with government money because it represents a moral challenge for a lot of people and I think we're better investing in places where the prospects are much better. And I think that's something like something known as alter-nuclear transfer where you create new embryo, like, entities, but they're not human embryos. And you can take stem cells from those.
So. Romney says parents who want to adopt out their embryos is the way to go -- and I agree with that. But then note what he says in the very next sentence: But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable. It should not be made against the law.
Say what? Could you imagine Romney saying, "But if a parent decides they want to donate one of their week-old infants for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable"??? But because the age of the embryo 'tis a bit younger, it's OK???
And this is the very sanctity-of-life issue he supposedly heard the altar call on?
Yes he is!
Gun grabbin’, Queer agenda lovin’, Abortion promotin’, Socialist.
There isn't a conservative bone in his worthless body.
Look Kevin, your desires sound reasoned on the face of it, but here is why you are wrong.
I was never a huge fan of GHW Bush. I supported him in 1988 because I saw him as a man that would be most likely to continue on the Reagan years. To a certain degree he did, but he drifted. His later comments on the new world order made me realize this guy’s world view was diametrically opposed to my own.
Then we had George W. Bush. I used to say I liked the guy. Today I will say that I don’t hate him. I have severe problems with all too much of how he led this nation. I hate what he ushered in. The guy drifted. He was on point on some things, but he was worse than his father. I’m not going to bother about what I liked or didn’t about him right now, there is honestly some of each. Still, what good he did was by in large scared by what he other things he did or didn’t do.
Now we’ve slipped so far over the last twenty years, that our party thinks John McCain is the standard bearer of our beliefs. They also think Mitt Romney would be a great leader.
So for me this isn’t so much about the hate of Romney as it is the hate of what people like him, McCain, Snowe, Specter, Graham, and others have done to to our party.
Abortion: Well just give it lip service, that’s all they really want
Borders: Don’t be a racist, those are just poor folks trying to get by in life
Defense: These are tough times, don’t push for what we need, push for the least you think they’ll accept
Big Government: Talk a good line about smaller government, then fund the biggest government you can, green projects, global warming, it’s all good...
Security: Downsize, eliminate needed programs, reach out to the other side, give away secrets and technology through trade, and if any objects, tell them they aren’t good Capitalists
Taxes: You can get away with adjusting them, if you make it look like only the rich are going to get hit
Associations: You can reach out to anyone, Soros, Kerry, the Tides Foundation, Gun Control groups... it’s all good, you’re a king makers, a deal maker, the consummate negotiator, and nobody will notice you’re negotiating your nation away
Look, where do we draw the line? People on our side are ripping our past present and future to shreds right in front of us, and yet we’re talking about the need to win, rather than the need to focus.
As a guy who has been voting for thirty-eight years, I’m going on the record as not being willing to watch this nation go one more inch to the left in MY name. If the Democrats want to slice and dice this nation, they can do it, but I won’t be voting for them, and I won’t be voting for anyone on my side to do the same things.
Romney isn’t worthy of being hated. I agree with that. He isn’t worthy of being supported either. And I’m not sorry at all, that I do hate what he has stood for, and I don’t trust him any farther than any other leftist I won’t vote for.
I’m looking for a Palin or Jindal type, someone who actually knows what Conservatism is, has governed as a Conservative, and plans on moving up the food chain as a Conservative.
All other need not apply. Don’t even submit an application.
I may be out of touch with what this nation is turning into, and if so my opinion won’t count for anything anyway. So just dismiss my thoughts here if you think you need a good middle of the road moderate, that will give you 70% of what Obama will.
I’m more than happy to disassociate myself with that effort. And there’s your problem isn’t it. If you don’t want Conservatives, then there’s no need for the Republican party. And bud, true Conservatives have gone as far left as they are every going to go, on their dime.
If you want to support leftists, there’s a party out there with open arms thrilled to have you. If you want to support Conservatives and the Republican party, then you’re in the right place already.
If leftist want Europe they should move there. If U.S. Citizens want leftist policy, they should join the Democrat party. Don’t sign on to changing our nation and our party. Just move right on down the road to where they share your views, be that here or there.