Posted on 08/07/2012 6:49:05 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
Conservative radio talk show host Mark Levin lashed out at GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney for not “standing up” for Chick-fil-A and demanded that the former Massachusetts governor pick a conservative to be his running mate.
“We want a little bit more than crumbs,” Levin asserted on Monday’s show. “We want a conservative running mate and we want some conservatives who have real speaking time at prime time.”
Levin said he continues to be “very concerned” about Romney, particularly with the candidate’s public reticence in recent days to join conservatives who have made statements and appearances on behalf of the embattled fast-food chain.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
By not even willing to offer a comment on the issue, not even some simple, generic thumbs-up for free speech, Romney left me with two possible interpretations. He’s got to be the most scared, politically timid politician I’ve ever seen, down to the point of cringe-worthy embarrassment. Or, he pretty much sides with the homo-marriage supporters and not the folks like me (who stood in long lines in 98-degree temps) who came out last Wednesday in support of Chick-Fil-A.
We are not clueless and neither is Levin entirely. If the First Ammendment right to speech is above your head and nothing but a side issue to you and to Romney, one that he must duck and not be “dragged into”, willing to be seen defending with his life, his liberty and his sacred honor, then I fully understand why we have a socialist/Marxist at the top of a Republican ticket. The galactically stupid not only demand nothing, stand for nothing, but will cheerfully tolerate anything in the name of fear. We are all Europe now.
Peace and safety at any price will assure you of neither. And SOON.
on this issue?
this is so stupid
As a character, Romney really is quite vapid. The only things to commend him are that he’s neither un-American nor anti-American. I think that he’ll be content to win the presidency. He has no interest in being a “great” American President.
Let his surrogates comment all they like. His position on marriage clear: one-man-one-woman. Marriage is a state issue; he's already been a governor and lost that battle in his state. Many here blame him for the outcome while none on the other side give him credit for it. Go figure.
The focus should be on Obama's record rather than creating a larger attack surface for Democrats to lie, distort, distract and demagogue.
Now you can all go back to attacking Romney, rather than defeating Obama.
I think the radical lefty’s have been working since Carter to get another far left guy that they know they need to put as much as their agenda into mainstream and try to pass as much as they can.
They are trying to change the general make up of the country by allowing illegals to get here and give tem amnesty thus making certain states Dem for life.
The homosexuals have gone all out NAZI in their tactics and they know they have to pass as much in order to wait for their next radical candidate plus they know their flower picker girlie guy obama might not get elected.
I just hoped that we would have got another Reagan or Allen West, a guy or gal who had guts to take on the establishment and the radical left, to put out AD’s saying what fmaily is and what made this country great, what the laws are, where we get rights etc.
That's just what this is and, fortunately, Romney's a bit smarter than to get dragged in this time. Expect more of these in the coming days, weeks, months.
Levin is a fool. This outcome was obvious from the very beginning, and Levin was still out there telling us we had to get behind the nominee just like all the rest of the lemmings. If he had any balls, he’d be throwing over the money changers’ tables in the RNC and undermining Mittens for a convention fight. But he doesn’t have any balls. He’ll throw red meat at his listeners and pretend that he is “holding Mittens feet to the fire!” as if that’ll change anything.
Guess what, they’re still voting for Mittens.
I think the radical lefty’s have been working since Carter to get another far left guy that they know they need to put as much as their agenda into mainstream and try to pass as much as they can.
They are trying to change the general make up of the country by allowing illegals to get here and give tem amnesty thus making certain states Dem for life.
The homosexuals have gone all out NAZI in their tactics and they know they have to pass as much in order to wait for their next radical candidate plus they know their flower picker girlie guy obama might not get elected.
I just hoped that we would have got another Reagan or Allen West, a guy or gal who had guts to take on the establishment and the radical left, to put out AD’s saying what fmaily is and what made this country great, what the laws are, where we get rights etc.
Oh, I know. The First Ammendment is such a drag and a bore for a nominee, himself, to have to deal with- a sign of real courage in a leader. His unquestionable understanding of American liberty and the sacrifice required to keep it must be deep sixed.
Outrageous cowardice in Romney and worse, an embarrassment to see so-called conservatives not only defend his ducking the issue of all issues, but recommend it! Heartbreak.
I agree with you and respect your stand up comment. If Romney ducks and exhibits political cowardice on the First Ammendment, and conservatives are going to defend it and recommend it, there is no hope.
The country deserves Romney when the patriots are so few as to be wished to “go away” by even their own brothers in the battle who have themselves caved.
My own pathetic theory is that the election of Romney will see the GOPE give him everything he wants, just cuz’, and what he wants is loud and clear;gay marriage, tyranny over religion, abortion, everything he gave to Massachusetts, the template for how to get it done that Obama has instituted. He is Obama and no one wants to admit it.
Their is a thin hope that Republicans take the senate and hold the house and if Obama is elected intead of Romney, they will freeze him in place! They won’t, however, freeze Romney, they will enable the socialist until conservatives take over the party. That is a ways off in the future. If ever, considering our troops drooping.
Trust me, the enablers of Romney Ruse, the template for Obama are the Democrat Underground. Patriots to the Constitution and strict interpretation of said document are shrinking daily in numbers, as your post reflects. Cowards are everywhere to enable more of the worst in the name of their new god named Fear.
The conditions of the “real world” will not be overcome by caving, tolerating, ducking, excusing and enabling the socialist/Marxist on our ticket.
It is liberty or death time for this nation. Not fighting is not an option. Not holding the dang line is not an option. If we go down, we go down rejecting the Marxist on our ticket, so be it.
If the time has come that we can not even defeat the Establishment who has a choke hold on the Republican Party, we are in so moral shape to defeat the domestic enemy.
All conservatives had the same hope but we got to play the cards we are dealt. I guess the battles are in our hands for now and whatever the price we have to pay it. The hippy freaks of the ‘60’s are teaching (and threatening our children) They have tenure and are not going anywhere. Things we gotta change - no more tenure - cripple the unions - much to do and a long time to have to do it. But, we have no choice unless we want a fascist/communist/progressive (or whatever) country we have to fight against almost impossible odds - with the leftist mainstream media cheering on the communists and quoting their lies. We just have to fight on.
A huge part of the problem is that our “leaders” won’t simply get up and denounce leftists misuse of the language. They’re effectively giving up the fight by allowing the enemy to define us.
The fact that the leftists can get away with defining anyone who disagrees with them as “haters,” that groups that support conservative views are “hate groups.”
This is really wrong. It’s effectively giving up the fight before it even begins.
Mark
In other words, it isn't about bequeathing rights to homosexuals -- it's about depriving rights of adoption agencies to reject candidates they RIGHTLY think would be highly risky as parents.
And in Massachusettes, where Romney pushed and passed a gay "rights" law that required adoption agencies to do just that in 2006, all of the Catholic adoption charities closed their doors, after being in the business for 109 years, rather than cooperate with a depraved social agenda at the price of the souls of innocent children.
That alone is reason enough to refuse to vote for Romney under any circumstances, even ABO -- Romney was and continues to be an unrepentant agent of depravity and evil.
American conservatives and Christians are on the verge of rationalizing voting for that as the imaginary "voting against Obama." But reality is that you cannot vote "against" anyone or anything on any ballot, ever. You can only vote FOR something to replace what you seek to vote "against." Even when you vote "against" a proposition, what your'e actually doing is voting FOR nixing it. Voting "against" is purely imaginary.
When a people vote for an extreme statist amoral liberal politician regardless of their reason for doing so, a bad outcome is guaranteed.
A bad outcome is guaranteed with Romney. I'm voting for a plurality -- odds are better for a positive outcome for conservatives if the next liberal president (and we're guaranteed to have a liberal Democrat in office whether it's Obama or Romney who wins) is elected on a plurality. The last liberal president elected on a plurality was bulldozed to the right by the Republican Revolution, and then impeached. The success of a plurality isn't guaranteed -- but the bad outcome of a landslide by extreme statist Romney IS guaranteed. Voting for Romney is as nuts as voting for Obama. I'm voting for a plurality -- it's the only and best chance for conservatism.
Don’t be an Obama-head.
Romney does not have to weigh in on every issue, and this was a stupid chik-fil-a protest NOT an issue of ground-break “First Ammendment” statue
Romney would have looked petty weighing in on this petty issue
I am glad the chik-fil-a protest backfired on the homos if if Romney did not actively support it.
Mr. RomneyCARE INVENTED gay marriage,
and could only have weighed in against Chick-a-fil
Which he did.
Mr. RomneyCARE’s agenda probably includes polyamory
and some claim marriage to animals.
Thanks, Nana.....will watch after I get home.
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.