Posted on 05/27/2012 10:29:08 PM PDT by WilliamIII
Bruce Willis gets it more than most “conservatives.” They’re fooling themselves that Mittens is going to be better than Obama. I don’t actually care who wins either.
As much as you agree with what, that Mitt Romney is “an embarrassment?”
Is this now the kind of world that we live in, where a successful statist and pathological liar is an “embarrassment” just because we don’t agree with his politics?
How sad.
—
There, fixed it for you.
I forgot about Romney being a compulsive, pathological liar.
It’s unlikely he can succeed at transforming the US into a dictatorship. For that you need the zealots and fanatics, who will destroy democracy in the same spirit that a religious revival destroys the Devil. He lost that loving feeling, win, lose or draw.
Yep. There were two big black guys with clubs and Romney buttons at my polling place who made sure I voted for the GOP-approved candidate.
Yes, you get it. We will pay through the nose with a Romney victory. We will be the price if Obama wins another term. In a second Obama term, there will be right thinking, or else.
I agree. He fell slightly short of saying he was a conservative, and slightly short of saying he supported Obama. Almost perfect for a hollywood interview.
I agree 100% with Bruce.
Bruce Willis is one of only a very few openly Conservative Hollywood celebrities who has had the guts to stand up to the vast number of liberals around him. And like Gary Sinese, he's a big supporter of the troops.
I would pay close attention to what he says...
I'm voting third party. Screw Romney and the GOP-E he rode in on.
What's sad is what Romney and his backstabbing GOP-E minions did to Sarah Palin beginning in September 2008.
They can go to hell!
Willis is an embarrassment to bad hairpieces.
“It’s unlikely he can succeed at transforming the US into a dictatorship. For that you need the zealots and fanatics, who will destroy democracy in the same spirit that a religious revival destroys the Devil. He lost that loving feeling, win, lose or draw.”
***
Well, there are zealots and fanatics out there...in the media, unions and elsewhere. I hear people say that Obama hasn’t been able to accomplish what he has set out to do because of Congress, and it will be necessary to dismantle Congress in order to achieve those ends. What do you think that kind of talk means?
On these points I find myself in complete agreement with Mr. Willis.
But then I left the Republican Party back in 1991 when "Read My Lips, No New Taxes" became one in a long series of broken promises by not just then President George H.W. Bush, but the Republican Party as a whole. I had some hope with the Republican Revolution of 1993 which lead to winning the House and Senate, only to be disappointed by the Republican Party becoming the party of big government spending later on. On that point, sometimes there really is little difference between the two parties.
It's all about who's in control and who's spending too much of OUR money at this point. The whole game is rigged and it sucks.
“Everybody wants to be Barack Obama. And what did he change?”
Answer: Obama changed a s*tload of things — all of them anti-American, extreme, and dangerous.
It means that they dearly do want to have a dictatorship. But what’s missing is the religious fervor to carry it off. At this point, the fanatics are starving for religious fervor. Obama is unable to provide it, because he’s lost his anointed status. He’s not “The One (who will bring about Heaven on Earth,” just “the (one in a position to further our agenda).” Further their agenda he will, but the bloom is off the rose. Alexis de Tocqueville noted this, that those that seek centralized administration of every aspect of the lives of others must do it as a religious or semi-religious movement. Writing in 1834 (?) he held up as an example of what happens when that movement-like fervor fades, the Ottoman Empire, which originally was a theocratic despotism, then started reforming and secularizing itself, and as a result was left as a mere despotism and therefore was in rapid decline. Eric Hoffer also says that true believers need to have a powerful belief in the future in order to sacrifice the present to it. O had that sort of revivalist fervor behind him in 2008, but he’s lost it. Without it, he can’t destroy 230+ years of democracy. He might want to, but he can’t, unless he can revive that fervor. He still a sucky, left-wing megalomaniac. But the religion he wants to sell to the true believers is himself, and right now he’s not salable as a religion, merely a politician. That could change, of course. But right now, he’s a good deal below critical mass, even if he wins.
Scoff all you want. The Republican hierarchy and its accomplices in the media promoted Romney from the start. Romney was described as the Republican candidate before the first primary was held. A large contingent of people don’t bother to do their own research on a candidate. If they hear Romney is the one, they aren’t going to vote for anyone else.
Look at the sabotage of Herman Cain’s candidacy. Where do you think all those broads came from? It wasn’t the Democrats. Notice too that the media, including Fox, reported all those allegations without question or investigation. Why do you think that was? The media was influenced to do their utmost to make Cain look as bad as possible. That influence came from the Republican hierarchy.
The other candidates also didn’t have a chance.
Well, he’s absolutely right. Romney IS an embarrassment. Obama and the Dems are imploding as we speak, and the best the GOP can do is a left-wing RINO, empty-suit pretty boy?
Sad part is, a lot of FReepers have decided to throw any pretense at principles out the window and support the guy, instead of rallying behind an actual conservative. Shame on you people.
And it wasn't just stuff like the scandals, either.
Let's look at Virginia, for a minute. Are we really supposed to believe that a successful multi-term governour of our second-largest state (Perry) and the brilliant intellect and organiser behind the Contract for America and the Republican Revolution in 1994 (Gingrich) were both so amateurishly incompetent that they couldn't even get it together to make sure they had enough signatures to get on the ballot in the VA primary, where both should theoretically have done well?
And isn't it odd and coincidental that they both had their sig lists gone over hyper-scrupulously, and had just enough tossed to disqualify them both? Meanwhile, Romney's lists went basically untouched and were accepted quickly?
Now, who was it that the GOP hierarchy in VA, from McDonnell on down supported? Oh right - Romney.
Or how about in Florida, where Gingrich's media ads were being held up in most major markets because they "need to be fact-checked," while Romney's much more negative and dishonest ads were run without problems? Wonder how that happened? Let's see, who did most of the GOP hierarchy in Florida support? You guessed it - Romney.
Let's face it - a major reason why Romney is the nominee is because he and his campaign scammed their way into it with the complicit help of the GOP-E, over and against the wishes of the majority of rank-and-file Republicans during the early primary season.
That makes him an illegitimate nominee. One who does not deserve nor should expect conservative support.
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.