It looks like Romney learned all about lying from Whorehouse Harry Reid:.....
“Harry Reid Justifies Lying About Romney from Senate Floor: ‘He Didn’t Win, Did He?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPYdNxYgxEA
.....”I suspect that the Establishment would even allow a systemic collapse of America. “Better to burn it and rule over ashes,” they think, “then to lose power.”.....
Yes.....however... they don’t have foreign Beach side Condos and Islands..... and Mountain Chalets on foreign soil for nothing.
Romney's statement is undeniably true. In an election, voters can use any benchmark they want. Many people use party affiliation. Others use policy positions. Some many look at the color of a candidate's skin, other may evaluation the content of a candidate's character. Hell, a voter can base his decision on whether or not he likes a candidate's shoes.
"Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections."
____
You are right. And along those lines, I regret to have to say that I continually worry about the President's safety.
I don't trust these lefty/Globalist/totalitarians one bit.
They are the worst of people, and those sick types get desperate and do awful things to reach their ends. They do not see wining with moral deeds as important whatsoever.
Actually, that Republicans occasionally eat their own is one of the few good things left about the party.
One of the few things that separates Republican swamp dwellers from Democrat swamp dwellers.
The difficulty lay in the standard of evidence acceptable.
For Republicans, even when they are not hyper sensitized, the standard is in political matters properly a stink test no matter if it is a Rublicans or Democrat under consideration. It is true: in politics there shouldn’t be a presumption of innocence ... that really is for criminal matters just as it should be, but often isn’t in people’s zeal to get a pound of flesh out of the bad guys, in civil matters.
With Democrats they employ a double standard: when considering Democrats it is often that without conviction the evidence is not acceptable as evidence. Thus you see them tout the lack of CONVICTIONS during Democrat administrations. Simply: they do not accept evidence that can be given because it is not somehow proven in a court of law. The same is often true in theological matters as well: the evidence that is acceptable as evidence is so qualified that functionally evidences (which are acceptable) may not be given.
Conversely, the left most definitely employs a stink test in matters where us “not we” to their “we” are concerned. Thus you see the often speak about the many INVESTIGATIONS of Republicans (keeping in mind that Republicans don’t abhor investigating Republicans as a rule as they frequently have a fundamental break in attitude with Democrats when it comes to their own) as if proof, the occasional conviction or ejection from office as proof of a more general principal (of corruption), and in general the failings of Republicans are seen as hypocricy though them not caring about the misdeeds of Democrats is NOT seen as hypocricy. Likewise we see such assertions that women don’t lie about rape go completely out the door if the accusee is on the right (or “left”) side of when the seriousness of the charges matter.
So why does this matter? Well, Republicans still accept stink test more or less unconditionally ... this isn’t a bad thing; but, as Democrats (leftists) prejudice evidence, are frequently immune to evidence against leftist even as they are rhetorically easy going with respect to evidence against not-we this inherently biases the political and cultural terrain against non-leftist simply because these two groups co-exist.
The answer isn’t to become more like Democrats though, for two bads can’t make a neutral.
The left will be bad. As with the victim mentality there comes a point when you must let go of hope they will reform and just let the glue that we’ve hoped still binds us all fall away, for it has been some time that it has bound them to us except as a matter of convenience to them when conviviality in politics and governance serves their purposes.
Being deluded that old ideals of the common culture means something still doesn’t make it so and this is seen in how the social contracts the left speak of only grow in scope and invasiveness, with the sole exception of who is doing who or what (sexual escapades now basically being the best exemplar of the chasing after happiness many acknowledge) they never retreat or let something remain a matter not for government authority.
To this end we must NOT become creatures of emotion as they are but we must learn to accept incrementalism, only in roll back to their advance, and deal with them as enemies to all we hold dear, for politically that’s what progressivism has been (at least with respect to governance by constitutional means) since it appeared in the 19th century.
Don’t hate, just don’t care. Don’t tolerate what positive tolerance is demanded for. “Tolerance” is not a virtue even though it is to the left THE virtue, only challenged by a “niceness” that can be at once murderous and libertine even at it is practically puritanical when it comes to want of tolerating Liberty and associations that dares not need or want progressivism.
but to reject the left’s whole world view. To dissolve the glue that might give a false sense of having something in common with them by NOT CARING about their political views and wants, working to simply defeat them as enemies without the emotions
by separating from their poisons within rather than be poisoned by the expression of their ideologies. Not caring
Mitt Romney is a Democrat with a “R” by his name.
If the Republican Establishment is successful in getting him the nomination, then cross over and vote for the Democrat. That way at leas the people will clearly know their Senator.
Fake Republicans like Mitt Romney need to be flushed out of the party. No more Democrats with “R”s by their names.
I do strongly suspect the Democrats support the fake Republicans like Romney in Republican Primaries. That way they win no matter who wins. Conservatives have to recognize this.
The deep swamp state tried to take out Donald Trump with all this fake Russian collusion. Judge Moore is getting the same type lies and hysteria thrown at him by deep state dirty ops. I am saying there is a pattern to defame and get rid of people. First it was (still is) Trump and now the lies and fake allegations are cranked up to get Judge Moore to quit the race or lose it to a Democrap.
Then you have the chorus of gelded Never Trumper Republican like Mitt Romney and some Senators telling Moore he should drop out.
They also said over and over again that Trump would lose until reality hit them at 11PM election night 2016. Judge Moore will be elected and will leave them looking like chumps. AGAIN!
Peter King, New York RINO Republican, said about Judge Moore “Prove you are innocent or resign”. WTF is the matter with these Uniparty RINOs?
Congressman King, you murdered a woman 40 years ago and buried her body. Prove you didn’t do that or resign!
I’m waiting for Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, and the folks at the Washington Post to condemn Prince Charles for dating a teenager, and subsequently marrying her, when he was in his 30s. Apparently, from Romney’s point of view anyone who even thinks of doing such a thing should be driven from public life.
and Willard is guilty as charged...hes a liberal idiot...that’s gotta be a criminal act...
I hereby allege that all uniparty dipsticks currently in Congress stole my yachts, are therefor unqualified to hold office, and therefor must resign immediately.
DC Swamp justice. Hangin’ first, trial later.
I've said before that the Majority of the Republicans in Washington DC are Kamikaze Republicans.
The are willing to die politically, and I dare say give up all their worldly possessions, rather than see Trumpisum survive.
I absolutely agree with that. I don’t care if there is no way of getting a jury which will unanimously convict Hillary - the public record convicts her, and there is no Republican I ever heard of bad enough to make me vote for Hillary against him (or her).And the voters of Alabama will make their own judgements about the choice between Judge Moore and his Democrat opponent. I expect their judgement to factor in:
- the actual seriousness of the charge considering:
- how seriously that charge, or worse, has been judged when politicians of the opposing political party have been in the dock (Can you say, “blue dress?” I knew you could).
- the state of the law, and of traditional morality, at the time of the alleged offense (Reportedly, the age of consent, of legal marriage with parental consent, and of legal marriage without it, were distinctly lower in AL at the time of the alleged events. Plenty of voters will have grandmothers or great-grandmothers who married before age 17). And,
- how many decades have passed since the alleged offense; is there credible reason to believe that the alleged offense will recur if the accused is elected?
- the credibility of the accusation, considering
- the number of decades of a lack of a pattern of antisocial behavior,
- ”he said, she said,”
- whatever vetting may reveal about the accusers and specific accusations.
- Finally and very importantly,
- policy preference alignment of the accused with the voters, and
- Anita Hill
- Harry Reid’s bold-faced lie about Romney’s income taxes
- the prosecution of Ted Stevens
- Michael Nifong and Crystal Mangum
Not that the alternatives weren’t worse, but I so regret now supporting and voting for both Bushes, John McCain, and Mitt Romney.
Amen, Laz.