Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WFTR

I’m happy to be amusing you, but will offer a couple points.

I stood pretty much alone in my objections to Bush, but as it turns out, he was a long term disaster for conservatism and for Liberty just as I thought he would be. His socialist big government, big spending ways and his push for amnesty damn near destroyed the Reagan coalition, and his panicky last minute push for the corrupt unconstitutional socialist TARP program and support of same by RINO McCain sealed HIS fate and made the deal for Obama to waltz into the White House.

And I’m no longer standing alone. FR’s rebellion against Rudy bore fruit and helped torpedo that RINO’s chances of ever sitting at Reagan’s desk.

And today we have a growing million strong TEA Party army rebelling against further government encroachment and big government, big spending, high taxing socialism and socialist causes.

Romney is busy trying to remake the GOP into democrat/socialist lite at the same time we the people are rebelling against it. Good luck with that.

Free Republic is no longer alone. We will be rising up against government overstepping along with hundreds of other grassroots groups and millions of fed up members of the voting public, regardless of party. Romney represents the status quo. The continued corrupt, big government expansion that we’re rebelling against. He is the domestic enemy. He is the enemy within the gates.

The TEA Party Rebellion is a rebellion against the Slick Willard Romney type politicians.

The GOP ignores us at their own peril!


426 posted on 05/03/2009 3:44:52 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies ]


To: Jim Robinson

I agree with you on ALL points!

Conservatism isn’t dead, the repulican elites are!

We will have our day soon enough!


433 posted on 05/03/2009 3:48:00 PM PDT by Randy Larsen ( BTW, If I offend you! Please let me know, I may want to offend you again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies ]

To: Jim Robinson

Well said Jim, BUT if you vote for Bush and vote for McCain regardless, the GOP knows that it can ignore you with impunity.


436 posted on 05/03/2009 3:50:03 PM PDT by Notary Sojac (Chains you can believe in...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies ]

To: Jim Robinson
Amen to that, Jim.

We seem to fall into this mode of supporting personalities and parties over our principles. We begin down this road of compromising our beliefs to support personalities and parties. President Reagan was the high watermark on conservatism in recent years. Yet, there were aspects of his presidency and even the man himself that disappointed his supporters. As much as I miss him as president, what he represented was much bigger than he was. He even understood that.

We should stand by the principles with steadfast determination....not the "celebrities" who vie for our support. This is not about party or the politicians. To me, this is about the U.S. Constitution, my liberties and the greatness of my country.

Just my measly .02 cents.

473 posted on 05/03/2009 4:10:40 PM PDT by Jagdgewehr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies ]

To: Jim Robinson
I stood against Mr. Bush as well in 2000, and I took a great deal of grief here on FR for writing about his weaknesses. Those who supported him seemed to think that they had license to cast insults. I'm glad to hear that I wasn't the only one with concerns.

I agree that FR objections may have played some part in Rudy Giuliani's loss, but if he had campaigned in New Hampshire, Michigan, and South Carolina, the race would have been very different. While I hate how much influence the early primaries have, the reality is that no one wins a nomination without an early primary or caucus win. Rudy Giuliani was wrong for the party, but tactical mistakes were as big as ideological issues in denying him the nomination.

I was at a meeting with some TEA Party folks a little over a week ago. The subject of who would lead the party and the conservative movement arose, and Mitt Romney's name was among those mentioned favorably. Others included Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Mark Sanford, and Eric Cantor. Strangely enough, Bobby Jindal isn't seen as highly favored as one would think here in Louisiana. If you're expecting the TEA Party movement to coalesce around hatred for Mr. Romney, you're fooling yourself. If you start kicking out TEA Party people who like Mr. Romney or have a generally positive feeling towards him, you're going to lose much of the TEA Party movement.

The GOP lost votes of some people by picking Sarah Palin to appeal to conservatives. While I think those who voted against the ticket because of Sarah Palin showed horrible ignorance and lack of judgment, their votes still counted as much as mine did. The GOP didn't ignore "us" in 2008, and the GOP still took the worst single-cycle loss that any party has taken in a long time. If "conservatives" define their objectives as dislike of Mitt Romney, both conservatives and Republicans will continue to lose. The conservative movement has to stand for something other than hating Mitt Romney. I hear what you say about smaller government, but the personal dislike of Mr. Romney seems to have the higher volume.

Bill

780 posted on 05/03/2009 9:56:17 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies ]

To: Jim Robinson
The GOP ignores us at their own peril!

THANK you!!!

825 posted on 05/04/2009 12:41:17 AM PDT by Brad’s Gramma (Life is but a big granola bar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson