Posted on 04/13/2012 12:13:14 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
A reminder for those who are not receiving the message:
Romney is a pathological compulsive liar. Lie after lie papered over with more lies. Doesn’t even flinch when caught in bald faced lies, simply tells another big whopper to cover up or dodge the issue. Funny thing, the man actually seems to believe his own latest lies and simply ignores the glaring record of his past actions/lies. And you have true blue establishment elite RINO Republicans like Karl Rove enabling and backing up his lies. Their motivation is simply to hang on to power (and riches) any way they can.
I’ve stated many times since Romney started running for the presidency way back when that I’d never vote for him and I will not. He cannot lie his way out of his decades long record of support for abortion, Roe v Wade, planned parenthood, gay rights, gun control, global warming, amnesty, liberal judges, big government, compulsory or socialized health care (RomneyCommieCare), mandates, Keynesian economics, support and approval of TARP, bailouts, stimulus packages, i.e, every damn liberal progressive issue that comes down the pike.
C’mon. These are the reasons the tea party sprang up and the reasons he and Rove loathe the tea party and our tea party conservative candidates. Romney famously expressed his loathing for Reagan-Bush conservatism several years ago when he was trying to run to the left of Ted Kennedy and now he’s cloaking himself in Reagan conservatism, knowing full well that it’s a lie, but he knows it’s the only way he can possibly win, er buy the Republican nomination.
Screw Romney!! I absolutely will not support or vote for a proven compulsive liar with a known record of abortion and big government socialism, liberal appointments, etc. He still lies about RomneyCommieCare today. Calls it a “conservative solution.” Get real!!
Listen to what Ronald Reagan had to say about the elites pushing socialism on America via compulsory health insurance:
Ronald Reagan speaks out against RomneyCommieCare
There will be no campaign for this Massachusetts liberal liar on FR!!
Damn the libs and RINOS, full steam ahead!!
But no matter what happens we must turn out in November to vote IN as many conservatives and vote OUT as many rats as possible at all levels of government. If we don't have a conservative at the top of the ticket we must turn out anyway and vote straight conservative DOWN ticket!! Just think of it an off cycle election and pour on the TEA!! It'll be doubly important that we control both houses of congress and as many statehouses as possible.
Restore the 10th amendment!! Impeach the leftist president whoever he may be!! Restore Liberty!! Rebellion comes from the bottom up!!
WOO HOO!! I CAN SEE NOVEMBER FROM MY HOUSE!!
No Bama!! No Romney!! Go tea party rebellion!!
Newt said that because he’s a candidate running and does not want to see the republicans move to Obama....that’s just statesmanship for crying out loud.....
Further though Romney has mentioned Newt serving with him..Newt said no...and that speaks volumes!
You're buying the propaganda from the elites and and MSM, bleating like scared sheep. I refuse to have a loser liberal foisted on me. I will NOT abandon my principles. You can do as you like.
Repost from 1430
The numbers are NOT with Mitt
Posted by noprisoners49 (Diary)
Friday, April 13th at 5:30PM EDT
48 Comments Recommenders: garfieldjl (Diary), dialove
Mitt Romney must win over 60% of all remaining hard delegates to secure the GOP nomination. Surprised?
19 states still need to be heard from, and of those states 869 hard delegates are available at the state and district level (discounting the 37 total delegates available between Indiana and Arkansas, which have proportionality rules only a democrat could love). State and committee GOP delegates number about 69, which I’m throwing into my calculations as a given for Romney.
Nevertheless, Romney still needs 663 delegates to reach that magic 1144 number.
Can he do it?
Of the 11,280,792 votes cast so far, Romney has accumulated 4,595,908 or only about 41%. Typically, Romney does not garner more than an average of 44% of the vote. Santorum averaged about 25% of the vote. Even if half of Santorum’s supporters vote for Mitt, this still does not give him the necessary 60+ % to secure the GOP nomination.
[All data from http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_vote_count.html].
They do.
I blame those who supported a liberal.
You blame those who won't/can't support a liberal.
You call having integrity stupid.
That standing on principle is wrong, that having values is a mistake, that having morals hurts our cause.
I am a conservative.
You are a pragmatist.
You are also a sellout, someone without conviction.
You are letting fear dictate your actions.
You are a sheep.
You are worthless.
Spineless.
It is you who do damage to the cause, not I.
Hypocrite! Coward!
Thank you, Jim
....
We are being asked to surrender our principles.
We are being told that voting for a leftist progressive liar is the only way to save the conservative movement.
We are being told that to stick with our principles is beyond common sense and hysterical.
...
but I know differently.
I know that once we have abandoned conservatism, we will never get it back.
#1704 - You were too easy on him, stop holding back. :p
Gingrich answered “probably not” but “not because I am opposed to Mitt.” and he also said he would be happy to serve as an advisor to Romney like he did with Bush.
There is no such thing as abandoning conservatism to save conservatism
Well, Palin did endorse Gingrich, didn't she?
The chances of Gingrich naming Palin as his VP are very low, but I can see possibilities. They do have a common background of being “break-up-the-good-old-boy network” people. Palin did write a book including her annoyance at Alaska Right to Life not being allowed to endorse her because she wasn't part of the Alaska GOP establishment.
It could work.
As for the response from the other side, it might include the following:
* “The snow and sunshine ticket”
* “The Ph.D. and six-year B.A. ticket”
* “Two losers, top and bottom of the ticket.”
* “Now we all know for sure that Newt wants to be the smartest guy in the room and can't tolerate intellectual competition.”
* “Gingrich wants to secede, but when the South walks they need Alaska oil, so he'll let Palin be an honorary Dixie Chick. After all, her hubby already likes the Alaska Independence Party.”
My point here is not to bash Palin, but to point out that Palin carries baggage which is unique to her. The hatred against Rick Santorum doesn't even come close to the hatred against Sarah Palin.
I am not necessarily opposed to a Palin presidency, though experience counts, and I believe she needs more “time in the chair.” However, I think I could support a Palin vice-presidency, and while I hadn't thought of a Gingrich-Palin ticket, I'm the first one to say that a radical game change at this point is needed. Palin might be the needed game change, and it would almost immediately neutralize the evangelical objections to Gingrich's moral background.
If Gingrich decides to name Palin as his vice-president I'll back the ticket and start trying to tell everyone I can that Gingrich has shown he's serious about conservative Christian issues or he wouldn't have taken the risk to put Palin on his ticket.
But let's not kid ourselves that everyone else is as pro-Palin as Freepers. She ignites tremendous negative response for a variety of reasons, some of them legitimate but most of them nonsense.
At this point Gingrich probably needs anything he can get to pull his campaign out of the dustbin, and naming Palin as VP could do that. It's a high-risk gamble — though intriguingly, the biggest negatives Palin has (lack of professional political experience, weak educational background, etc.) are the precise areas where Gingrich is strongest, and Gingrich's weak points are where Palin is strongest.
And if Gingrich wins the presidency, after four years of daily classes from Professor Gingrich, anyone who hasn't learned a lot must have rocks for brains. I think four years of education from Gingrich would be very helpful to Palin, and probably everybody else dealing with Gingrich on a regular basis. I have no doubt that Gingrich would be a better professor than anyone Palin took in college, and she'd learn a great deal from him.
The more I think about it, the more I think the idea of nominating Palin has some real potential and they could make a good team.
Probably won't happen, but this whole campaign has been strange, and we're down to the point that nothing but high-risk gambles are likely to pay off.
Your cause and mine are not the same. You aim to accelerate the demise of the United States by hiding behind fraudulent principles. I aim to fight to save the country I live, and when presented with a choice I will choose whatever option is best for the country. I don’t believe Mitt Romney represents my principles very well. However, I do believe that on the whole, Mitt Romney and the staff he constructs will be infinitely better than the radical leftists currently running the country.
Maybe conservative means giving up on the country. Maybe you think conviction means you do not fight your enemies. Maybe you think being conservative means you just go cry in the corner and let the enemy run roughshod because you didn’t get your way. Maybe you’re actually as much of a f***ing retard as you sound. I’m not sure.
I’m done with you.
They are not conservative. Watch the movie.
Well said, RetSignman. Thank you.
They're simply looking for someone to blame , should Obama win they certainly aren't going to blame themselves for failing to support/vote Newt when they had the chance to do so.
They'll be blaming all those who wouldn't vote Romney, and those who choose not to put their hand at all to either the Romeny or Obama slime. But guaranteed they won't blame those who voted "FOR'" Obama by voting "For" Romney....
I won't be voting for either of the two...Will not put my hand to all which they stand for and will bring about thereafter....not going to happen! I will continue to vote Newt until he wins or he says he's out.
Add Wilson to that list.
The GOP sent in Romney because it was his turn like McPain - knowing he will lose, clearing the field for better candidates in 2016 - or so their theory goes on the assumption that Obama (in his second term) does not void the Constitution completely, pack the Supreme Court, bypass Congress completely through regulatory agencies, and run for a third term.
Should any of that come to pass, the GOP will howl, then roll over asking for their collective tummies to be scratched.
Yep.
Newt needs a homerun, badly.
DOVER, DE — Given the opportunity to work in Mitt Romney’s cabinet, Newt Gingrich says he would pass.
I think Newt needs to shake things up.
Palin can do that, you remember what it did for McCain. (before McCain basically endorsed Obama)
I think Newt wins most of the remaining primaries if he made a big deal about taking Palin as a running mate (assuming she’d go for it)
[We will keep praying and put our trust in Him while taking our own stand on our principles that we know are right.]
Thank you onyx, although I would never try to interpret His reasons or designs, what IF He allowed the current occupant of our White House to have such absolute power over us?
Way to many of our population has grown complacent to the status quo, just maybe we are looking at a wake up call that, if true and ignored would be at our peril.
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.