Make Obama or any other POTUS for that matter, pay for their "czars" out of their own pocket.
Hell, make them pay for their entire support staff that way. Goes for congress too.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: When Congress offers you a bill, do you promise not to use presidential signings to get your way?
OBAMA: “Yes… This is part of the whole theory of George Bush that he can make laws as he is going along. I disagree with that. I taught the Constitution for 10 years. I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We are not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end run around Congress. All right?â€
What in the? What does this have to do with Boehner again?
Who are you replacing incumbent Republicans with? you have a posse waiting in the wings to take an incumbent (R) on? links?
Was Planned Parenthood defunded. Nope
Was NPR defunded. Nope
Did the House get to vote on 100 billion cuts. Nope
Boehner is a weakling. We need a Republician who will stand up to the President and tell him we won and we are going to pass legislation that the voters want not what you want. I don't know if there is such a critter in the House of R.
The government would have been shut down = political suicide for 2012.
But he would have showed him right?
Who would have been hurt if the shut down was over funding for abortions? Boehner should have been hammering Obama on that issue. Hell, McCain should have hammered Obama on being pro murder during the campaign, for that matter.
You dont take the only weapon you have and throw it off the damn table... who the hell does that? Boehner took shutting the govt down off the table before the talks even started. How are you going to 'pull the trigger' if youve thrown the only 'gun' you had away? And thats not the worst part. Now we have nothing ... we have to bargain from weakness from here on out in all future talks. Its pathetic!
You only live once. To be courageous, or be a coward. To stand for your family, or not. To stand for your country, or not. We not only know where Boehner stands .. or sits. But so does the pathological liar in chief who now 'owns' Boehner.
Who knows if shutting down the govt would have been worse for Republicans. I think not if we had had anybody up their who was passionate enough about saving this great Republic on Capital Hill, to educate and rally the voters. Especially on our side. I think we DO have such representatives. We would have supported and stood with him/her from corners he/she doesnt even know exist. But Boehner is not one of them/us. He is a very, very small man. Worried more about his own political fortunes than the future of this Great Nation.
He will never advance now. He will only go down hill from here. He has no idea of who he is dealing with in the marxist pathological liar Obama. He is not Carter. He is not Clinton. This is NOT business as usual. Obama IS diabolical. I pray Boehner doesnt take us down with him .. before we can find a proper replacement. Because this is NOT just politics. We are on the very edge of losing everything.
This is not hyperbole. And I hope and pray that the ones who do not understand this do not get in the way. Its hard enough fighting this POS and the POS Party from fundamentally screwing this nation forever w/o a bunch of wimpy 'moderates' and country club blue blood types tripping us up every chance they get.
You dont take the only weapon you have and throw it off the damn table... who the hell does that?
The premise of your argument is flawed. The government shutdown was the weapon of the president, not the GOP.
Don't forget the US military not being paid. I know for a fact that would've been heaped on the Republicans even though the Demonrats were using the military as pawns.
The GOP would have been hurt.
The premise of your argument is flawed. The government shutdown was the weapon of the president, not the GOP.
Janice is right.Until the 2012 elections we might never get anything done as long as the House caves in and the dictator in chief decides what laws he will and won't follow.
You would think Democratic professionals, who read the same numbers Republicans do and pick up similar trends, would be hanging their heads in despair..
They are not. They have hope. Their hope is that Republicans in the early caucus and primary states will go crazy.
They hope the GOP will nominate for the presidency someone strange, extreme or barely qualified. They hope that in a mood of antic cultural pique, or in a great acting out of disdain for elites, or to annoy the mainstream media, Republican voters will raise high candidates who are unacceptable to everyone else. Everyone else of course being the great and vital center, which hires and fires presidents. The Democrats' hope is that centrists will look at the Republican nominee and, holding their nose, choose the devil they know. Especially if the one they don't know seems to have little horns under his hair.
Republicans voting in recent presidential primaries have tended to pick the candidates who are viewed as the moderate in the race—Bob Dole in 1996, George W. Bush in 2000, John McCain in 2008. But in truth, there are some pretty antic candidates out there this year.
The great question of the coming year is not, "Will Obama reignite his base?" or, "Will the Democrats outraise and outspend the GOP?" It is: Will the GOP be serious? Will Republicans be equal to their history, their tradition and the moment? If they are—if they recruit and support candidates who can speak to the entire country, who have serious experience and accomplishments, who are grounded and credible, then they will win centrist support. And with it they will likely win the thing without which they cannot achieve the big changes they seek, and that is the presidency
Facts eh? The weapon of the president? I suppose King Stinky holds all the cards doesnt he?
Newt would have been in Obama's face, called him out and won.
Peggy Noonan a RINO too? I should keep a list.
Hehe .... that is too much. That wsj article is shot with about as many holes as you are my friend. LOL.
Indeed you should. She used to be 'all in' on our side. She used to absolutely 'knock 'em out of the park'.
I dont know what happened. Maybe the 'conventional wisdom' bug finally caught up with her.
Its a shame really. And shes not the only one in recent times ...
Tea Party to the Rescue
How the GOP was saved from Bush and the establishment.
By PEGGY NOONAN
Two central facts give shape to the historic 2010 election. The first is not understood by Republicans, and the second not admitted by Democrats.
The first: the tea party is not a "threat" to the Republican Party, the tea party saved the Republican Party. In a broad sense, the tea party rescued it from being the fat, unhappy, querulous creature it had become, a party that didn't remember anymore why it existed, or what its historical purpose was. The tea party, with its energy and earnestness, restored the GOP to itself.
In a practical sense, the tea party saved the Republican Party in this cycle by not going third-party. It could have. The broadly based, locally autonomous movement seems to have made a rolling decision, group by group, to take part in Republican primaries and back Republican hopefuls. (According to the Center for the Study of the American Electorate, four million more Republicans voted in primaries this year than Democrats, the GOP's highest such turnout since 1970. I wonder who those people were?)
Because of this, because they did not go third-party, Nov. 2 is not going to be a disaster for the Republicans, but a triumph.
Correct. Dole and McCain were losers from the start. These blue blood northeastern Rockefeller RINO's want another repeat of those type of candidates. Bush was lucky. He had the good fortune to run against 2 sorry Democrats. Moderation will not get the job done. Repubs need a strong, ass kicking conservative that will take on Obama on the economy, health care, debt, employment, etc.
Correct. Dole and McCain were losers from the start. These blue blood northeastern Rockefeller RINO's want another repeat of those type of candidates. Bush was lucky. He had the good fortune to run against 2 sorry Democrats. Moderation will not get the job done. Repubs need a strong, ass kicking conservative that will take on Obama on the economy, health care, debt, employment, etc.
It is time for Boehner to stand up and fight on the debt ceiling and the upcoming budget. If he does not, the Repub base will get disgusted with him wimping out. The Tea Party might just put up a candidate in 2012 if the Repubs do not get their act together.
Yup. Exactly right. Apparently you can 'see the writing' on Peggy Noonans wall.
We should see more and more of such 'conventional wisdom' proffered by the media 'elites' as the elections near. Especially if real conservatives enter the ring. If that happens, there will be a fever pitch to steer this conversation. And not towards conservatism either.
This is as predictable as the sun coming up.
Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates. You don't have the votes.
Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates. You don't have the votes.
This is the mistake many on our side make. Yes we want the moderates. But we dont water down our values to attract them. Instead we 'educate' them. We make our case why our ideas are the best. And rather than us moving to the left, we convince the moderates to move towards us. This is what Reagan did, and he took the states to a landslide victory.
Most Americans are conservative, even if they dont know it. But the left has so corrupted the language and the culture. Every election presents an opportunity for our side to 'educate' the voters why our ideas are the best. And it becomes a bit more problematic because of our current public 'indoctrination' centers (govt schools) we all attend. And the Uni's are even worse. Its an uphill battle but it must be fought ... our we will lose everything.
This is what we need now. Remember the media will always be in the democrat camp, so dont expect them to root for us, even when we do 'moderate'. They want us to moderate so that we will lose. Like what happened with McCain.
The 'conventional wisdom' offered by the media to conservatives is usually dead wrong. Do you think they really want us to win? Why would they offer such advise? I'll tell you why. Because they want us to lose. Bank on it.
Many of the members of the Tea Party are Independent voters. There is no moderate party or group. That is just a made up term. Independent voters have moved away from Obama in droves. Most of them are right of center.
Putting up a so called moderate (your terminology) will wind up being another disaster for Republicans. A me too candidate like Romney will assure Obama of 4 more years. Voters want a reversal of Obama policies; not to moderate them. The perfect candidate for the Repubs will go after Obama in a vigorous way on the following issues. Jobs, debt, energy, spending, taxes, etc. We do not need a moderates to trim around the edges. Bush did not veto a single bill his first 7 years in office. Republicans better get some balls or we will wind up in the ditch with finances like Japan,Greece, Portugal, Ireland, etc.
He's "construing" all of us. Or is that "screwing"??? :redbird:
HAHAHAHA -- there are no moderates. Ok, gotcha. :whatever:I said moderate party. Learn how to read. :mental: How many blue dog democrats are in Congress? Ring a bell with you. How many are outside the South? Ring a bell with you. Most voters are conservative (not middle of the roaders) You read polls? You see what happened to those liberal, RINO, moderate politicans in the last election in state legislatures, Governors and Congressional elections. The voters are not looking for politicans that are moderate. :loser: :hammer: We had a moderate in McCain the last time and he got his ass kicked.
Democrat, Republican = wide spectrum of beliefs. You have the far left to the far right. Blue dog democrats ring any bells with you? Most of the members hover around the middle. That does not make them "independents" (which by the way in MA is referred to as "unenrolled").
One can throw around the politically immature term RINO with reckless abandon, but that doesn't remove them from the party. Ditto for those blue dogs.
You don't win elections without them and the unenrolled voters. You may like to think you can, but you only need to look to history to see that isn't so.
I said moderate party. Learn how to read. :mental: How many blue dog democrats are in Congress? Ring a bell with you. How many are outside the South? Ring a bell with you. Most voters are conservative (not middle of the roaders) You read polls? You see what happened to those liberal, RINO, moderate politicans in the last election in state legislatures, Governors and Congressional elections. The voters are not looking for politicans that are moderate. :loser: :hammer: We had a moderate in McCain the last time and he got his ass kicked.
Like I said before, your boy Romney gets the nomination I say home. He is a flip flopping liar.
Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates. You don't have the votes.
Many of the members of the Tea Party are Independent voters. There is no moderate party or group. That is just a made up term. Independent voters have moved away from Obama in droves. Most of them are right of center.
My boy? Gee, for my elder your maturity level is questionable at best. Romney isn't my "boy," whatever the hell than means.
Romney gets the nomination you are supporting Obama - yeah, I got that and stated so. You like to repeat yourself don't you?
As for your comments on moderates. Here is my post:
Your response:
I do believe it is you that needs to be brushing up on reading comprehension. :wink:
Ah, you are immature and extremely politically naive.
Let me spell it out for you -- you stay home, you vote for Obama by default.
You keep telling yourself otherwise. ::)
Ah, you are immature and extremely politically naive.
Let me spell it out for you -- you stay home, you vote for Obama by default.
You keep telling yourself otherwise. ::)
So tell me, oh sage of the political scene: I go out and pull the lever for the limp dick asshole the RINOs are running as an (R). Damned near the second after he takes the oath of office, the spineless mother****er makes an "across three lanes of traffic" swerve leftward.
How long am I supposed to keep pulling the lever for a cocksucker who says he stands for what I do when he needs my vote, and thenvotes withreaches across the aisle to the leftists tearing apart my country as soon as the election is over, before I am allowed to conclude that I have a better chance of getting what I want from a slot machine than from pulling the (R) lever?
So tell me, oh sage of the political scene: I go out and pull the lever for the limp dick asshole the RINOs are running as an (R). Damned near the second after he takes the oath of office, the spineless mother****er makes an "across three lanes of traffic" swerve leftward.
How long am I supposed to keep pulling the lever for a cocksucker who says he stands for what I do when he needs my vote, and thenvotes withreaches across the aisle to the leftists tearing apart my country as soon as the election is over, before I am allowed to conclude that I have a better chance of getting what I want from a slot machine than from pulling the (R) lever?
Our brilliant analyst who is probably still wet behind the ears will tell us that Romney is a conservative, and that he has changed his position on Obamacare, abortion, gay rights, immigration, etc. We do not need an ass kissing moderate. We have got too many of those pricks with an R behind their name in Congress.The last thing I want as as a candidate is a Yankee blue blood ass kissing RINO. Bush and Obama have ****ed this country up and they were Supposed To Be So Intelligent. I will not vote for a lying piece of shit like Romney.
IMO, If the GOP nominates another "moderate", we'll end up with 4 more years of Obama in the WH. I think the mid-terms were a pretty good indication that America is fed up with moderates and liberals.
I never said Romney was a conservative.
You stay home = voting for Obama. I am going to keep reminding you of that until it sinks in, however I am not holding my breath.
I am going to keep reminding you that the Repubs need a conservative to straighten out the mess Bush and Obama has put us in. A moderate will only trim around the edges. What is needed is a conservative that will take a chainsaw to the budget and eliminate agencies.
Romney is a liberal and a liar. He has flip flopped on many issues. Just because he has an R by his name does not mean a candidate will get my vote. Independents are tired of these politicans that say one thing and then when they get elected do another. That shit might fly in Yankee land but not in the rest of the country. The Repubs can win without winning the state of MA and most of the northastern states. So you can take your moderation and cram it cause it is a recipe for another defeat. Plus, you've got it ass backwards; most independents (Tea Party) lean towards conservatism not moderation.
Plus, you've got it ass backwards; most independents (Tea Party) lean towards conservatism not moderation.
For someone of advanced years, you truly are the most clueless person I have read in quite some time who claims to be a conservative.
First of all, Mitt Romney will most likely not get the nomination, and I don't see anyone here who is advocating for him to get it (there was one poster who some of you ran off in a NY minute, but that happens to most political cowards who can't stick it out for those they support). However, should he win the nomination then your commentary here is pretty much a non-starter as he would have secured the support of the party.
He wins the nomination then you will stay home, which is the equivilent of pulling the lever for Obama. In your tunnel vision world, Romney would be worse than the communist.
Should it be Obama vs Romney, with Obama winning, then any comment from the peanut gallery crowd of the "real conservatives" should be shoved up their collective asses, as by staying home they put Obama in office. But but you showed "them" right? "Them" of course never being clearly defined.
That is the very simple reality of it all.
Your juvenile posts are typical of Yankee RINO's who think that Repubs should run a moderate. We tried that crap the last time with McCain. Plus, McCain is more conservative than Romney.
As it stands, Romney is the front runner. He is a liar and a flip flopper which YOU have never addressed. I wonder why. All you can come up with is that we need a moderate candidate. I oppose that stupid thinking.
A Tea Party candidate like Palin is someone that I could enthusiastically support. Not some limp dick liberal like Romney who would change his views once he got in office. Would you vote for Palin?
If you are perfectly ok with Obama as president then you stay home. That's how long you have to do it.
The whining from the "real conservatives" over the (R) presidential candidate never ceases to sicken me. You have short of two years to get your candidate accepted by the ENTIRE party (which would include the RINOs, i.e. moderates), so you better get busy.
Your candidate being?
Nice dodge of my question, sir. :jerkit: As I never said I was planning on staying home, what the hell does that have to do with the price of rice in China?
So tell me, oh sage of the political scene: I go out and pull the lever for the limp dick asshole the RINOs are running as an (R). Damned near the second after he takes the oath of office, the spineless mother****er makes an "across three lanes of traffic" swerve leftward.
How long am I supposed to keep pulling the lever for a cocksucker who says he stands for what I do when he needs my vote, and thenvotes withreaches across the aisle to the leftists tearing apart my country as soon as the election is over, before I am allowed to conclude that I have a better chance of getting what I want from a slot machine than from pulling the (R) lever?
If you are perfectly ok with Obama as president then you stay home. That's how long you have to do it.
Now, if we can get to the topic at hand: Do I, or do I not have justification and reasonable expectation that when I vote for a representative, the son of a bitch better ****ing well REPRESENT me? That representing me does not mean getting down on his ****ing knees before their lordships the Dhimmi'Rats whenever representation of me means opposing the agenda of the traitorous Dhimmi'Rats?
When the hell am I supposed to get what I'm paying for with the value of my vote? And when the hell am I supposed to step away from the ****in' one-armed bandit, and look for something that will show a better return on my investment than the Republican party?
Nice dodge of my question, sir. :jerkit: As I never said I was planning on staying home, what the hell does that have to do with the price of rice in China?Junior does not like to answer questions. I asked if he would vote for Palin if she was the nominee.
Now, if we can get to the topic at hand: Do I, or do I not have justification and reasonable expectation that when I vote for a representative, the son of a bitch better ****ing well REPRESENT me? That representing me does not mean getting down on his ****ing knees before their lordships the Dhimmi'Rats whenever representation of me means opposing the agenda of the traitorous Dhimmi'Rats?
When the hell am I supposed to get what I'm paying for with the value of my vote? And when the hell am I supposed to step away from the ****in' one-armed bandit, and look for something that will show a better return on my investment than the Republican party?
Junior does not like to answer questions. I asked if he would vote for Palin if she was the nominee.
I missed your question. Yes I would vote for Sarah Palin if she was the nominee.
Now answer my question.
If your question who out the bunch I would not vote for, it is Romney because he is a liberal in my opinion. The rest of them I probably would.
Where did I state that we needed a moderate candidate? take your time oh emotional one, as I never said it.
You want to debate Romney? then post something other than mass resistance, and we will talk about it. I don't have any issue with those who don't support him, however just base it on facts, which for you is extremely difficult I as suspect you are incapable of forming any sort of independent thought.
Now, maybe I got it all wrong ... but, it appears that in formerlurker we have a true blue unrepentant 'moderate' republicrat folks.
That would make the likes of Lacarnut, DefiantSix, rich_t, myself and others here 'radicals' in his mindset or world view.
I suspect that in the final analysis no amount of reason is going to change that, given current arguments have held no sway to this point.
So thats it. We can choose between democrat or democrat light. Anything else is 'unconscionable' or 'out of touch with reality'.
So, there we have it gentlemen. Carry on.
Oh ... btw .. I think your in good company formerlurker. I believe much or most of the GOP 'leadership' would heartily agree with you and your analysis. We certainly cant fault you there. In many circles I believe its called 'conventional wisdom'.
Unfortunately for you and for them, that is not why they/ we won the House back from the demons .. err demos or whatever our GOP friends call them. (Sorry, I know this is something you dont understand and consequently cannot or wont agree with, but should be noted nonetheless)
Looks like a moderate, sounds like a moderate, walks like a moderate ...
:popcorn:
Nothing, as I expected.
Whining is all you accomplish. It's not election season until the "real conservatives" dust off their keyboards and whine with proficiency.
If nothing, you are most consistent in that regard. :)
(http://i55.tinypic.com/34hjfk0.jpg)
Sorry formerlurker, I may have you all wrong. But these days my automatic gut reaction to those on our side who vigorously defend moderate repukes is revulsion. We have today a party and its leader who want to absolutely destroy this country as we once knew it. They have been going at it now for a very long time. Brick by brick. And now theyve brought a bull dozer. Our constitution like our freedoms are an affront to them. They really are 'the enemy within the gates' in my view.
Now on the other hand we have another party that we used to regularly send to Washington to be our advocates and to stand as a contrast to the statists and the socialists. The differences between the two didnt use to be so stark as they pretty much seemed to heading in the same direction. The only difference was by degree. But that has changed. The dems are running headlong right off the cliff and into the sea and taking us and our country with them by design imho.
We recently took back about 80 seats in Congress. We also took back many of the State Houses too. And the lord willing we will take back the Senate and the Presidency come the next election. All of this predicated on the promise that we would stop and reverse this train wreck. This out of control spending. Simple right? Well ... maybe not. Despite the fact that we overwhelmingly took back the House (which all spending originates from) and will probably take back the Senate next election (lord willing) we still have a GOP leadership that has been there for decades.
Now we didnt elect this leadership ... that is to say they came to this position because 'its their turn'. Thats how seniority works there. Which is all good and fine ... most of the time. This is not one of those times. The enemy (democrat leadership and much of the party) has an agenda to bring this economy to its knees and to knock this country down a notch or two. They hold most of the reins of power and they hold this country in contempt. Now as if that wasnt enough we have an entrenched GOP leadership that apparently feels they are more like royalty than elected representatives. Now normally they should present a stark contrast between them and the opposing party. Why? Because we are right.. and they are wrong. Not only that but they (the democrat party) are also morally bankrupt. So we have moral, ethical and constitutional issues at play here.
What it boils down to is they (the democrat party) want to rescind our inalienable rights and enslave us. Just shred the constitution and do whatever the hell they want to with us. Are you with me so far? Well here is where it gets a bit murky. We have sent a majority to Congress that wants to make a stand against this tyranny. But their hands are tied for the most part as they are all freshmen. They dont have any 'seniority'. So they more or less have to toe the line with whatever the 'leadership' wants. Unfortunately the current GOP leadership have no spine. None at all, except for one thing. They have a LOT of spine to tell me whatever they think I want to hear, then turn right around and do whatever they please. Come election time they will out and outright lie to me to get my vote. Then after theyve secured their position and its time to legislate or vote on legislation they turn right around and give me the middle finger. Just like that. In essence they say Janice we appreciate your vote. Without you and millions like you we would not be here. Now ... go **** yourself.
Rather than go to Washington to do what we sent them to do, they get behind closed doors with the enemy (liberal democrats) and pat each other on the backs at what a bunch of idiots we are. In fact they both (both party leaderships) seem to view us (the voters) especially conservative voters as a bunch of rubes. And sometimes I must confess they appear to be right. How in the world can we keep sending these 'pretend' conservatives to Washington and expect a different result? These are career politicians who have been there for so long, they wouldnt know the truth if it slapped them in the face. And they know even less about core values and principles, unless it has something to do with keeping their power. These people will say anything to retain that power. And they will tell me whatever they think I want to hear to keep it that way. Then when its time to make the changes I voted for them to do, they just flip me off.
Well, I gotta tell you I am beyond sick and tired of this charade. These politicians are not royalty. They are not 'entitled', contrary to what they seem to believe. They ARE SUPPOSED to be there temporary - not forever. They are SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT US, not the status quo. But apparently they (the current GOP leadership) never seem to get it, because they are bullet proof, or seem to think they are bullet proof. And I hold voters accountable for that presumption too. But I for one am NOT going to take it anymore. And I dont give a shit what anybody else says I have had enough. And Im not interested in losing my country because of a few arrogant, self important prima donnas.
They (the GOP) apparently believe they can 'compromise' with the enemy (the extreme far left currently in power). Knowing that these ingrates have utter contempt for our Countrys founding documents and our liberties, what part of our freedoms are they willing to compromise on? The left (eventually) wants to completely do away with all or most of them. What part are we going to agree to with them? Lets say they want to do away with 100% of our freedom of speech (which of course they are currently working on), what part of that freedom are we willing to give on? 50%? 35%? What? How much are we supposed to compromise our rights and liberties away with these morons? Remember ... once they are gone.. thats it. Kiss them good bye. They are gone forever.
So .. back to the support of 'moderates'. If I've got you all wrong, I do apologize. But, I gotta tell ya... when I hear these spineless middle of the roaders defended I have a natural gag reflex. Its almost like ingesting poison. I just cant take it anymore. And Im hoping that in these next 2 elections that I am not alone.
Here are some facts about your boy. In 1994, Romney stated that he unshakably supported abortion and stem cell research while running against dead Ted for the Senate. When he became Governor 8 years later, he was for civil unions for queers. He has changed his tune on those issues and states that he is pro family in his personal life and in his political life.
It is hard for me to image a Christian of long standing like Romney ever having those views. Moral values are important to most conservatives. Consequently, I believe he is a hypocrite and was never in favor of those issues but only said so to get elected. This is exactly the kind of politician I despise. I can understand a politician that flip flops on issues like the war, spending, etc but to flip flop on morality is a bitter pill for the sake of expediency and to get elected in a very liberal state is hard for a conservatives like my self to swallow. Therefore, I will not vote for him under any circumstances. Romney apologist like you are the ones doing the whining with your bs about if you don't vote for a snake in the grass you are casting a vote for Obama..
Here are some facts about your boy. In 1994, Romney stated that he unshakably supported abortion and stem cell research while running against dead Ted for the Senate. When he became Governor 8 years later, he was for civil unions for queers. He has changed his tune on those issues and states that he is pro family in his personal life and in his political life.
It is hard for me to image a Christian of long standing like Romney ever having those views. Moral values are important to most conservatives. Consequently, I believe he is a hypocrite and was never in favor of those issues but only said so to get elected. This is exactly the kind of politician I despise. I can understand a politician that flip flops on issues like the war, spending, etc but to flip flop on morality is a bitter pill for the sake of expediency and to get elected in a very liberal state is hard for a conservatives like my self to swallow. Therefore, I will not vote for him under any circumstances. Romney apologist like you are the ones doing the whining with your bs about if you don't vote for a snake in the grass you are casting a vote for Obama..
Where did I state that we needed a moderate candidate? take your time oh emotional one, as I never said it.
You want to debate Romney? then post something other than mass resistance, and we will talk about it. I don't have any issue with those who don't support him, however just base it on facts, which for you is extremely difficult I as suspect you are incapable of forming any sort of independent thought.
::)There is no nonsense attached to the fact that passage of abortion and stem cell legislation amounts to government intervention and government funding. Even a dummy can see that. BTW, there are private companies that do stem cell research. See, I have a problem with government meddling and pissing our taxes away.
In his debate with Kennedy -- he stated his personal beliefs should not conflict with his role in government. He stated that at that time, his opinion was formulated on a family member or friend who died having an illegal abortion. He changed his position. I can see the conflict when you are running in liberal MA, but he did it and explained why.
Stem cell? another conflict I can see because his wife has MS. However, he explained his change of position on that also. He also vetoed a bunch of bills on stem cell research when he was governor.
The civil union issue? and? He has always been against gay marriage. He attempted to get the issue placed on the MA ballot but was blocked by the liberal legislature. I think the GOP pretty much as a whole has no problem with civil unions, which clearly is a state issue.
The rest of your nonsense is just that -- nonsense.
Oh and still waiting for your response:
Quote from: formerlurker on April 24, 2011, 09:15:47 am
There is no nonsense attached to the fact that passage of abortion and stem cell legislation amounts to government intervention and government funding. Even a dummy can see that. BTW, there are private companies that do stem cell research. See, I have a problem with government meddling and pissing our taxes away.
I did not say anything about gay marriage. I said he was for civil unions.
His explanations are a pack of lies in my opinion.
Most of the people on this board do not consider Romney a conservative. He is a liberal who is trying to pull the wool over our eyes like Obama did. His former views on abortion, stem cell funding, etc are not moderate either. His flip flopping over so many issues tells me that he is not to be trusted. Too many politicians say one thing and do another once in office. I have a very low opinion of politicians. In other words, I would believe/trust a used car salesman over a politician.
'Lurker, are you even remotely familiar with how the '10 elections played out for anybody not condemned to live in a perpetual liberal wasteland?
I give you as just one example, my own state of Colorado. We had Comrade Hickenlooper being run on the Dhimmi'Rat ticket, mostly because he'd been mayor of Denver since rocks were new and it was "his turn". On the other side of the ballot was Tom Tancredo, former Republican congressman, former '08 Presidential candidate, and conservative just about as honest - relatively speaking - as a politician with more than 30 days in the position could be expected these days.
His downside? Being fed up with the politics as usual of the Republican Party, he ran under the American Constitution Party, and the Powers That Be within the Republican Party hierarchy couldn't stand for that. They imported a disgraced former Kansas LEO, Dan Maes, to run for Colorado Governor on the GOP ticket. They didn't do a damned thing to advocate for him, didn't do anything at all to hide his utterly disreputable nature as a corrupt, over-bearing public official. He was there for one reason, and one reason only: to ensure that Tancredo didn't win. And he served the GOP well: he drew off 10% of the vote in November. 10% that the Republican PartyPiss Be Upon Them counted on to blindly vote the (R) ticket, regardless of who's name was on the line.
10% that DELIBERATELY handed the State of Colorado over to the Dhimmi'Rats for another 4 years just so a "disaffected former Republican" wouldn't be the first crack in the dike of the Republican Party's stranglehold on traditional, conservative voters.
This, Sir, is why your, "If you don't vote for the (R), you're handing your vote to Obama" rings hollow with me anymore. After you've finished choking down on this ugly side of the Rethuglican party, we can talk about Skuzzyfava.
"Together our groups strongly urge you to reconsider, withdraw your ultimatum, stay in the Republican Party, let the process play out for the governor's race," said the letter signed by 21 active Tea Party and 9.12 groups. "In other words, to trust and respect the newly awakened, energized and informed voters of Colorado."
The letter said that if Tancredo carries out his promise, it means an "impending disaster, assuring victory for Mayor Hickenlooper and the liberal agenda in Colorado for at least four more years."
The letter also cited an unscientific survey of Tea Party members that suggested 66 percent would not vote for Tancredo in the governor's race.
Don Rodgers, leader of the Pikes Peak Patriots in Colorado Springs, said Tancredo has contradicted himself.
"He said a third party or a minor party would be suicidal. He encouraged us to get involved, and we had thousands of people who did just that," Rodgers said.
"They became delegates. They did it through the process. Because Tom didn't like who they had chosen, he gave us this ultimatum."
Anytime you want to answer my question....
Sir, if the GOP had been "in it to win it" last year, I wouldn't have cared a whit how the race turned out. They weren't: they fronted an "ethically challenged" candidate that NOBODY in the state could get behind solely for the purpose of sabotaging the legitimate candidacy of a conservative. In reality, they did EXACTLY what you run off at the mouth and accuse conservatives who cannot stomach voting for another limp-dick Dhimmi'Rat in (R) clothing of doing: throwing the race to the Dhimmi'Rat.
So long as the Republican Leadership is willing to throw a race like that, my Rat's-Ass-o-Meter just doesn't even twitch whenever you RINOs whine and moan about having Obama in office because conservatives couldn't see a difference between throwing a vote away to the big-government socialist (dem-lite) asshole, and throwing a vote to the big-government Marxist (real® Dem) asshole he was "running" against.
I am not interested in defining what is a moderate but I can tell you who is one. .....
Where did I state that we needed a moderate candidate?
That's nice. Whenever you want to answer my question. Let me bold and enlarge it for you to give you a hand as you seem to be lost in your own thoughts/mind:
YOU SEEM TO BE STUCK ON STUPID. YOUR BOY ROMNEY IS A FLIP FLOPPING LIBERAL POSING AS A MODERATE CONSERVATIVE.
Where did I advocate for Romney to get the nomination halfwit?
You seem to be stuck on stupid. Dumbass. No more RINO's.
This is rather comical now.
Yep, you are a joke with your moderate bs and everyone is laughing at you.
The DU misfits ain't got nada nothing on you do they? You are a one note wonder.
Next.
I see a number of people support my position that we need more strong conservatives. Not weak kneed lying Yankee Republicans politicians like Romney that you support. You are a one trick retarded pony with your compromising agenda.
I hope the Donald runs (not wins) cause he will tear Romney a new asshole. Not that would be funny. Maybe the remaining male candidates will get a backbone.
"Retarded" pony?
Using references reserved for significantly cognitively impaired individuals as a slur just demonstrates the exceptionally immature, vile, thick-headed, pathetic excuse for a man that you are.
For the last time, where did I advocate for Romney, or any moderate, to secure the nomination? Let me answer for you as it appears reading comprehension is a serious problem for you -- I never did.
Retarded pony refers to you since you have your head so far up your ass with your moderation ideology. Don't get your bowels in an uproar; your brains are liable to explode. Everyone is laughing at your dumb ass.
Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates. You don't have the votes.