This is Groundhog Day all over again.
Because of endorsements, because of VP selections, because of hinted cabinet members, because of potential justices, conservatives should vote to go backward in the hope that they’ll go forward.
As someone has said, Romney is a “consensus builder”. So, if a majority can be found only with conservative votes, then Romney will make a conservative decision.
The flip side: If a majority can be found with a combination of liberal democrat and rino votes, then Romney, a liberal by DNA, will “consensus” himself to exactly where he wants to end up.
So, ask yourself this simple question, “Will libs and rinos be willing to agree on a liberal direction?”
Does a wild bear.....
That's it in a nutshell. I'm smelling a whole lot of "if" coming off this plan. Basically, the pro-Romney people are trying to sell us on their candidate by asking us to ignore his entire history and record prior to mid-2007, and to just "trust them" that he's not really playing them like a cheap violin.
I'd almost think they were just trying to play some drawn out parody of 1984, what with all the stuff going down the memory hole and all the revision of Romney as the next great paladin of conservatism, except I know that they're serious. That's what sad. They're serious. They're scared, they're not thinking straight, they're letting their emotions get the better of them, and they're serious. They actually believe that electing Romney is going to make much difference versus Obama. Yet - as I've noticed - not a single **** one of them has been able to actually answer any of the points I've made or the questions I've asked. All they can do is yap about "you're just helping to re-elect Obama!" or "you just hate Mormons!" while regaling us with tendentious stories about John Schmitz that serve to replace intelligence with verbosity.
And this is the state of "conservative activism"?
Looks like we need some new conservative activism. The old type is obviously sclerotic.