Posted on 01/08/2012 8:41:50 AM PST by vbmoneyspender
Take the Scarlett O'Hara pledge.
Your vote wasn’t worth much anyway.
Back 'atcha R-Illinois.
"I have often said that when we talk about abortion, we are talking about two lives — the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child. Why else do we call a pregnant woman a mother?"
However, the 'liberal' law he signed amended California law to allow abortions in cases of rape or incest, when a doctor deemed that the birth was likely to impair the physical or mental health of the mother, or when there was 'substantial risk' that the child would be born deformed. That would be considered a 'restrictive' law today. Furthermore, Reagan claimed to have regretted the law, and that doctors abused it to perform far more abortions than intended by the Legislature. So, is that pro-abortion or anti-abortion?
As long as I’m voting against Obama, I would take no responsibility whatsoever should he win.
Don’t underestimate the power of the Tea Party and the New Media.We can make it very uncomfortable for a rino potus who does not see things our way.We live by the constitution. The first time he does not we will raise so much hell he will think twice about doing it again. “If” we get a romney. But remember what Yogi said.
You have fallen victim to the 2007-2008 lies that the Romney camp flooded the media with. Romney was pro-abortion, 100% any abortion at all of the baby for whatever reason the mother chose. He stated he thoroughly supported a woman's right to murder her baby. He believed a woman's ability to abort her child should never be infringed upon.
Reagan went from no abortion at all except for the life of he mother to no abortion except for the health of the mother. Certainly not the same thing.
"Obamacare: Mitt is on the record as wanting to repeal Obamacare."
He can say whatever. Stupid people believe him. He is also on the record loving the Obamacare mandate. He did the same thing as Obama in Massachusetts forcing people to purchase medical insurance or pay large fines. He still thinks that Romneycare is a good thing and Obamacare is based on Romneycare. The only thing he does not like about Obamacare is the name. If they change the name to Romneycare, he'd be fine with it.
"Gay marriage: So pushing for a Federal law recognizing marriage as one man and one woman means gay marriage supporter?"
He was pushing for ENDA (the special rights for gays act) too and getting gays in the military. But the thing that makes him a gay marriage supporter is that he is the father of gay marriage in the US. No other candidate can say that. He ordered the justices of the peace in Massachusetts to change the forms and allow gays to marry. The court ordered the legislature to change the law. But the democrat controlled legislature would not do it out of fear the people would throw them out of office. So Mitt did the dems dirty work for them. He swears that the court ordered him to do it. But if you read the decree it only speaks to the legislature and they weren't going to act. We have gay marriage in this country because of Mitt Romney alone.
Finally, how do you know Mitt won't ask for amnesty? Just because he says he doesn't want it? Is Mitt lying now or was he lying then? Ask the illegals that were caught working for him twice.
You can never trust Mitt "Lying Azz" Romney, ever! If Mitt's mouth is moving there is a lie there somewhere. He is nothing like Reagan at all. He's like Obama if he's like anyone else. They are both lying pretenders, not worthy of anyone's vote.
One very big problem with your theory is that the RINOs have allies. They are called democrats. The dems will join with the RINOs to make conservative legislators’ lives a living hell. They will pass things the dems would never be able to pass on their own. As they have done in Texas and Florida, the RINOs will join with dems to eliminate conservatives and they will create laws that they like whether constitutional or not. Because the RINOs will have cover from the president and help from the dems, we will not be able to stop them.
They’ll get that shiny new law they just passed enforced in order to make sure TEA Party members know their place. That is what will happen if we put a DIABLO (Democrat in all but label only) like Romney into the office of president.
In Romney’s own words, he isn’t a conservative. His record shows he likes appointing liberal judges. We already have a liberal socialist candidate. Why would I support one with an R behind his name? Does socialism and individual mandates taste better under a GOP banner?
Fail. That hasn’t worked before and it won’t work with Romney.
How many of the so called conservatives have already bent over for him? Plenty. If that SOB gets into office he won’t be challenged at all.
I want a warrior for life, not a panderer for votes.
Then forget politicians.
Santorum :)
Win, lose or whatever, I will stand before God knowing I did what I could to protect the innocents.
“A third party will hand the Presidency back to Obama.”
You may be right, depending on whether a conservative runs as third party or some other candidate... or you may be wrong.
I believe a Romney nomination will hand the Presidency back to Obama - deflating the conservative base that drives our party. As evidence, I suggest you look at Dole and McCain.
I will not vote for another RINO - especially one who has already demonstrated in office that he is a democrat. You can follow your own conscience.
A lot of people don’t realize that Mitt Romney has been fighting conservatism his entire life, he isn’t just a rino, he has a lifetime before his switch to running for president, of being an anti-conservative.
Reagan, Jesse Helms, the Contract with America, he was against them all and even left the party because the Reagan branch of the GOP prevailed in 1980.
A young Mitt even joined his father in stomping off the convention floor in a public rejection of the Goldwater nomination in 1964.
He may even have moved his mother farther left than she deserves, we can’t find the evidence that his mother ran on a pro-abortion platform in her 1970 Senate race as he has claimed during his political campaigns, and Romney’s deadly media campaign to recreate Reagan with, “Reagan was adamantly pro-choice” will now endure on the internet and in future discussions (even on this thread).
A president Romney would poison conservatism, he would strive to undermine it and contaminate it in a Soviet style.
Reagan was a Democrat...
Reagan HAD been a democrat, in a time long ago, in a land far, far away.
Reagan campaigned for Republicans as a “democrat for Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956” and for Nixon against JFK in 1960, then he formally switched registration in 1962, a time before the madness.
Romney left the party of Reagan because Reagan became president. By the way, that was after the Vietnam war, Roe v Wade, the Warren Court, Jimmy Carter, the 1960s, the radical left, the start of the abortion wars, the first part of the ‘Reagan Revolution’, etc, etc, etc, when we knew the difference between conservatism and liberalism.
I don’t blame you. A stand has to be taken. In the grand scheme of things there is very little difference between Obama and Romney.
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.