Posted on 08/11/2012 4:42:48 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Except for his unfortunate go along to get along support of TARP, bailouts, stimulus spending and the increased credit limit, etc, Ryan is a pretty good choice. Probably the best choice of the RINOS that were on Romney's short list. I support Ryan for the vice presidency. Wish he were at the top of the ticket, though.
But I still cannot and will not support the grand father of ObamaCare. Romney still loves and brags about his bastard brainchild, RomneyCare, even today when he knows what an anti-liberty socialist POS it is.
And the fact that he advocated that abortion should be safe and legal in America for over three decades of his adult lifetime and even advocated that Roe v Wade should be supported and sustained as settled law precludes any consideration whatsoever by this pro-life Christian for Myth Romney for the presidency.
And the fact that he boasted that he would be better for "gay rights" than Ted Kennedy, and proved it just increases my resistance.
That, and his penchant for gun control, his continuing support for global warming, gays in the scouts, gays in the military, and his record of appointing liberal judges makes it all but impossible for me to support him.
Lastly, we're having a bit of changeover on our moderator staff. At least two moderators resigned this afternoon after I flatly refused to rein in a so-called anti-Mormon "bigot" on FR. Well, if being in opposition to false prophets and false prophecy makes a Christian believer a bigot, then I guess I'm a bigot. I've posted before that I flat do not believe that the Book of Mormon is the true word of God. Nor do I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. The Christian bible warns us to be weary of false prophets and that I am. Romney being the presumptive Republican nominee does not change that fact.
I agree with you. I asked the question and did not get an answer. Not surprising. As I posted earlier, they are trying to hijack the site. In an audacious manner, I might add... calling for conservative FReepers to be zotted. Unbelievable.
If the GOPe continues the strategy of nominating ever more liberal candidates each election cycle you wont have the opportunity to vote for Palin or any other conservative next time around.
Folks have to simply say no to liberals now to have any chance of electing conservatives in the future.
Thanks for your gracious reply.
Ah, backtraking. He was not elected by the people anymore then the EPA.
Sniff, sniff....
“it;s amazing how many on here are having baby tantrums due to the owner of the site not wanting to vote for Romney. I’ve seen zot me, ban me, close my account, WTH is all that about.”
I agree. Jim has not changed his position. These people bouncing off the wall seem to insist he must change. He isn’t zotting these people who have a different opinion, but they seem to want to zot him.
They evidently want a web site where the owner supports Romney. That isn’t going to happen. It’s too bad they can’t tolerate an opinion different than theirs.
Elsie is crazy. I kind of feel sorry for her. They probably let her out of her locked room once in a while and let her post on the computer.
I’m not all that concerned. You confuse derision and scorn with concern. Good luck with your english skills, Mr. English Bachelor’s Degree.
=========================================================
Jeff, with respect I have to point out that you are a disciple of Joseph Smith and as such not a disciple of Jesus Christ, as the 2 are in direct opposition to each other.
You must choose either one or the other, you cannot choose both.
"If ye abide in my word, then are ye truly my disciples;"
Well, this thread has been a lesson....yeah, I'm ashamed ;(
RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)
If I was a betting person (I'm not), I'd be willing to wager that Goode, Hoefling, and Romney will all lose the 15 races I highlighted. Is that something you would bet against?
Remember, "ABO" stems from a purely pragmatic utilitarian political relativist posture. From that same angle, then voting for Goode in Oregon is a better idea than voting for Romney in Oregon because conservatist principles are thereby elevated -- vs. RINOism.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of ABO. Implicit in ABO is that Obama *must* be defeated.
And you have a fundamental misunderstanding of electoral politics -- at least when it comes to applying the "ABO" tactic.
You see if you attach that caveat ("Obama *must* be defeated")...Romney doesn't have to win all 51 "mini races" to defeat Obama.
In fact, we know he won't.
Frankly, an "ABO" strategy -- as you define it -- in those 14 states + D.C. is worthless for getting Obama to lose in those states.
And, frankly, an "ABO" tactic just among FREEPERs doesn't defeat Obama any more in red states than he will/would already be defeated. Obama will lose the red states even if 100% of FREEPERs voted for Goode/Hoefling in those states.
So...realistically, an "ABO" tactic -- as YOU define it (Romney only) -- if applied to the swing states...would result in an Obama loss.
So...the "ABO" strategy (as you define it) really doesn't work for about 40 states. (The results will be the same for those states -- with or without it)
Ah, so you get to vote for your purity and we have to do all the work in the battleground states
Ah. My apologies. I was laboring under the (evidently) mistaken impression that you knew how to read.
If you live in a deep blue or red state, then do what you want. It won’t matter. But those of us in toss-up states don’t have that luxury. And for those of us in toss-up states who do not believe the country will survive four more years of Obama, to vote for anyone other than Romney would not be rational.
You should be careful. Obama has infiltrators posting on sites like this one, pretending to be conservatives.
Their goal is a second term for Obama.
As a conservative, you might have been duped by them.
Well, to be fair to you, it could have been taken that way, and I am not convinced it is a completely wrong inference.
The problem, and why I hedge, is technical definitions of terms like Marxist, Socialist, Communist, Leftist, Liberal, etc., have all been conflated to a common meaning in the FR lexicon, and indicators of one tend to be taken as an indicator of all. I think that is somewhat careless, but I see no way to stop it or correct it.
And you do have to admit, the mind that can produce and justify RomneyCare is not far off the line from the societal evolution that Marx predicted and hoped for. Like certain kinds of tumors are described as precancerous, is it not fair to describe oppressive liberal social theory as a necessary precondition to full-blown Marxism, complete with early indicators of all its worst traits? And would that not lead some in good faith to simplify the descriptive process by lumping them all together for rhetorical purposes?
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.