Jim, when Laz called you a leader, he was being very accurate.
Sometimes, the truth just has to be verbalized.
You are a leader, because you refuse to compromise your principles.
The recent intensity around here concerning Romney was an excellent illustration of this fact.
With Santorum dropping out, and Newt being so low in the polls, and all the calls coming from the GOP-E to “get behind the leader”, you alone said “Not me!”.
You stood in one place and would not be moved.
Your defense of your position made me reassess just how little of a Republican and a conservative Romney really is compared to the hype about him.
It made me decide that while there is still one conservative standing, I would get behind that man and support him until that man was out of the race. I did not have to be forced into the false decision of Romney or Obama.
There was another option, and overlooked. I would support Newt until he threw in the towel. Newt was not my first choice, but the other choices were culled out of the race.
At least Newt stood for conservative principles.
It was shocking to see how little Romney really stood for. Since I never supported him, I did not look too deeply into his positions.
But you Jim were immovable on the subject of abortion. When I studied the history of Romney’s positions on abortion, it made me angry, because I had been a part of the pro-life movement for well over 25 years.
I respect your stand, and admire your steadfastness.
It inspired me not to grow weary, but instead to renew the battle.
My late mother used to tell me “To thine own self, be true.”
For if we cannot be true to ourselves, then we cannot be true to anyone else.
The fight is not over. We are not puppets of the Republican Party.
We are realizing that the Party is leaving us. And they are free to go.
We stand on our principles and can stand in no other place.
The winds of change blow as they will, but a leader knows himself and raises a flag for others to guide upon.
Thank you for being a leader, Jim. It is a such a rarity today.
And Laz, I cannot tell you how refreshing it is to see your compassion and clarity on this thread. I always knew you were above average in intelligence due to the high level of humor in your posts, but after this thread there can be no doubt.
One last thing—this thread has a lot of long time Freepers who I deeply respect.It is good to see your names. Gideon did not need a vast army to defeat an oversized enemy. The quality of you longtime Freepers make us a Gideon-type army fighting for the best values of America and for our families. You really are great Americans.
Thank you for articulating that. That's the dilemma I find myself in, frankly. My greatest fear is not that Romney is a RINO, but that he isn't; that he is a true indicator of the future direction of the Republican party and that I, as a conservative already disdainful of tribal politics, am a relic of the past.
I quit the Republican party a few weeks ago. It wasn't anything particularly dramatic, no burning of any card of return of a decoder ring, just a call to the local office to let them know I wouldn't be available for fund-raising this time around. But I think it's for good. I'll still vote conservative but the party's out.
The reason is not that a perfect candidate has not surfaced. I've been around long enough to know that no such thing exists, not even Palin or Cheney or Reagan himself. But what has surfaced is that one way or another I'm going to be forced to vote for something I oppose in order to oppose something else I oppose. That's a fool's game.
There is, to be sure, the usual dram of political hysteria whipped up by the partisans of both sides: 0bama the crypto-Islamic crypto-fascist Machiavellian monster whose re-election will end America as we know it; Romney the only hope, however degraded and frail, that America will gasp out her desperate survival over the next four years. Frankly, it's nonsense. Either man can damage the country and both are highly likely to. To hell with them both.
I am particularly tired of the Manichaean tendencies of both sides - a failure to vote for Romney constituting a vote for 0bama, for one. That, too, is nonsense. A vote for Romney is a vote for Romney. A vote for 0bama is a vote for 0bama. That's how it works. "No" is only an option for school bonds and tax levies and the like, not for candidates. Enough of this.
The issue, I think, is that both parties have veered rather sharply to the left, the Democrats more so but the Republicans not so very far behind, and I do not speak strictly of the Presidential candidates. That's the game, whipped on by both media and academia who tend, broadly, to the left themselves. I drew the rather desolate conclusion that the only RINO, Republican In Name Only, was me. And so no more name only, no more name at all. No more.
The establishment Democrats were very successful in presenting the country with a glamorous celebrity that reflected their own most flattering self-image in the racist incompetent that is 0bama; the establishment Republicans have countered with what may well be equal success in presenting the country with their own plastic mannequin who, like 0bama, is a tabula rasa who will say anything at any time, on whom the hopeful and credulous will project their own illusions. It is a classic case of framing the question such that either alternative gives the same result. As I said, a fool's game.
Could either man win my vote? No. Show me his programs, though, and his staff, and we'll see if I can vote for them, if I believe he'll actually see them through. Otherwise, let me be blunt: I don't give a rat's ass, because the America I know is going to be hunkering down in survival mode while the plastic puppets play on their well-lit plastic stage. It may come to that either way, and that's one hell of a thing to say in a Presidential election year.