PDA

View Full Version : Mitt Romney is the Next Ronald Reagan:



jjf3rd77
05-02-2012, 08:28 PM
Hello all, new to the forums and thought I would share with you my thoughts on Mitt Romney and why I am voting for him

This Blog Post was written by someone else. I took somethings out and made it more modern. The guy who wrote this is apparently at least 20 years older than me.

Over the past few [days], since I’ve announced my support for Mitt Romney, I’ve been subject to a barrage of verbal abuse from my conservative friends. In fact, at times I’ve been tempted to scuttle away while screaming, “I am not a sell out, I am a human being!”

I have decided not to scuttle along and accept the insults and derisive comments which have been directed toward me. Why? Because - I'm right! Yes, I'm right again. As i've stated previously, Mitt Romney has the best chance of defeating Barak Obama! Newt Gingrich will [drop out May 1], Ron Paul will lose [and retire at the convention], and the rest of the candidates [have already dropped out.]

But, again, why Romney? For those of you who don’t realize it - Mitt Romney is conservative. In fact, he is VERY conservative. Many people refer to him as moderate and some even ridiculously refer to him as a liberal Republican - nothing could be further from the truth. Since when is a candidate who believes in lower taxes, smaller government, secure borders, energy independence, a strong military, federalism, and conservative Supreme Court justices - considered to be moderate or liberal? I challenge anyone to point to anyone of his stated policies which indicates he is liberal or moderate.

Also, for those of you who don’t realize it - Mitt Romney is an outsider. He has never worked in Washington DC, he is not a darling of the Republican establishment, and he’s certainly not a friend of the liberal establishment. I’ve never seen an example of him receiving or giving political favors from or to any Washington insiders. I challenge anyone to provide an example of how Mitt Romney has benefited from his inside the beltway political relationships. [Has he spent over 30 years in congress?] Not that I can see.

Additionally, for those of you who are easily manipulated when the words “flip flop” are applied to conservative politicians by the liberal media; isn’t it okay to flip flop if your new position(s) is/are conservative? Personally, I’m glad Ronald Reagan flip flopped from the Democrat to the Republican party. I’m glad Bill Clinton flip flopped on welfare reform and signed the Republican welfare reform legislation. I’m glad Barak Obama flip flopped on Guantanamo. On the issues Mitt Romney has allegedly flip flopped on - has he changed from conservative to liberal positions or has he become more conservative?

If my comparing Romney to Reagan is tempting you to use the line, “I knew Ronald Reagan, Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine...Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan” - I have a few points. Mitt Romney is as conservative as Ronald Reagan! Yes, I said he’s as conservative as Reagan! On issue by issue - Romney is as conservative as our own Ronaldus Magnus!

Now, let me tell you one more way Romney is similar to Reagan - Romney doesn’t scare moderates or independents. That’s right, it’s important for conservative Republicans not to be scary. Why? Because the liberal media WILL demonize the Republican candidate and try to make people think he or she eats children. I remember very clearly how the liberal media tried to demonize Reagan when he ran for the presidency in 1979. Why didn’t it work? Because when people watched and listened to Reagan they could see he was a decent guy - and they ignored the media. In the same way, Romney doesn’t scare people; he’s a nice guy and so it will be difficult for the liberal media to demonize him.

Sorry, but I need to make this next point, because it’s critical for conservatives to accept. It is very easy for the liberal media to demonize Newt Gingrich. Why? Because HE LOOKS EVIL! Newt, although he might be the nicest man in the world, has a face which (with a little help from the liberal media) will give children nightmares. [Ron Paul looks like your crazy uncle. Would you trust your crazy uncle to rule the world, if you didn't know anything about him? Rick Santorum looked too much like a preacher man. Bauchmann sincerely looked like a crazy witch. And finally Herman Cain was a black republican. He would NEVER appeal to the majority of the country.] Yes, it’s sad but true, looks do matter in a presidential election.

Okay, back to my Reagan comparison. Another way Romney is similar to Reagan is how he can articulate the conservative message. When you listen to Romney explain and defend his positions on the issues it becomes very apparent he has a deep knowledge and understanding of the issues. For some unknown reason it has been a challenge recently for Republicans to nominate candidates who can speak in complete sentences. Do you remember how George H.W. Bush mangled the English language? Do you remember how George W. Bush mangled the English language? We should be thankful the Democrats nominated two morons when GW ran - Gore and Kerry. Do you remember how John McCain articulated conservatism? No? Neither do I - because he couldn’t. Romney, on the other hand, has a deep grasp of why conservatism is the best political, economic, and moral philosophy - and he does an excellent job defending it. I will concede that Romney isn’t Ronald Reagan when it comes to giving a speech; but, there was only one Ronald Reagan - nobody has ever given better political speeches than Reagan.

So why am I supporting Mitt Romney? Is it because I’m a sell out to the conservative cause? NO! It’s because Mitt Romney is the most articulate Republican running for president. It’s because Mitt Romney is an outsider who has no ties to Washington DC and the Washington DC political establishment. It’s because he’s the MOST conservative and most importantly he will beat Obama - and end this nightmare called the Obama Administration!

Words in [] brackets are my own added material: http://kenhand.blogspot.com/2011/12/mitt-romney-is-next-ronald-reagan.html This is not my blog

Deadhead
05-02-2012, 08:40 PM
First off, hello. Secondly, let's slow it down here a little bit. Everybody hailed Obama as the second coming of Jesus and look how that ended up. Let's just work on getting Mitt in the white house first.

Retread
05-02-2012, 09:28 PM
First off, hello. Secondly, let's slow it down here a little bit. Everybody hailed Obama as the second coming of Jesus and look how that ended up. Let's just work on getting Mitt in the white house first.

aren't you the one sitting this out?

Janice
05-02-2012, 09:31 PM
Whoa! Who spiked the house punch here?

Deadhead
05-02-2012, 09:32 PM
aren't you the one sitting this out?
No, that was somebody else. I'm happily voting for Romney, I'm just not actively campaigning for him or anything

Retread
05-02-2012, 10:03 PM
Say again? (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?48573-Is-it-OK-to-sit-out-in-2012&p=498483&viewfull=1#post498483)

Rockntractor
05-02-2012, 10:08 PM
Say again? (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?48573-Is-it-OK-to-sit-out-in-2012&p=498483&viewfull=1#post498483)

She forgets some of her stories, timelines can be a problem.

Apache
05-02-2012, 11:25 PM
Welcome jj. That being said, I ain't buyin' into Romney/conservative. He's got a lot of 'splainin' to do, before I voteFOR him. I'm more in the camp of, "It's his turn" and we were allowed to go through the motions...

There were better conservative candidates in the field.

Gina
05-03-2012, 07:19 AM
In the primary, I voted preacherman Santorum. I also voted for Fred Thompson instead of McCain but that's neither here nor there. Romney seems like a decent guy but I'm not ready to accept Romney = Reagan. Not by a long shot.

Molon Labe
05-03-2012, 08:51 AM
If you had said Romney was the next Bill Clinton you'd have hit the nail on the head. Romney is a walking talking boring Robo bot who generates about as much enthusiasm as Bob Dole did.

Flip flopping because you've finally concluded that you were wrong for years is one thing, but Romney held ALL his positions right up to the day he started campaigning for POTUS and his tendancies still seep through if you listen to him enough.

I hate to break the news to you but conservatives and tea partiers are running for the hills from this guy. Why don't you just attend your local GOP meeting and see for yourself.

so lol at this thread

but welcome.

Molon Labe
05-03-2012, 08:53 AM
No, that was somebody else. I'm happily voting for Romney, I'm just not actively campaigning for him or anything

That's the story of his campaign. Only time someone shows up is to vote for him. His whole campaign is astro turf.

Rockntractor
05-03-2012, 10:15 AM
I think Mitt Romney is the Next Mitt Romney, I hope he does well.

m00
05-03-2012, 10:38 AM
I hate to break the news to you but conservatives and tea partiers are running for the hills from this guy. Why don't you just attend your local GOP meeting and see for yourself.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ralstons-flash/2012/may/02/rnc-nv-gop-dont-let-ron-paul-delegates-take-over-n/

"RNC to NV GOP: Don’t let Ron Paul delegates take over national convention slots or don’t bother coming to Tampa"


It's to the point where the RNC is threatening state parties to vote how they say, or their vote won't count.

Zeus
05-03-2012, 11:09 AM
Back when RR first got elected he ,in the minds of many,was a weak conservative and "the lesser of two evils".

Not saying Mitt is a RR type but he is the Republican candidate, not an also ran or a should have ran but The Republican candidate for President running against the Democrat incumbent President. Your choices are one or the other. In the end only one will win.

Odysseus
05-03-2012, 11:54 AM
Back when RR first got elected he ,in the minds of many,was a weak conservative and "the lesser of two evils".

Not saying Mitt is a RR type but he is the Republican candidate, not an also ran or a should have ran but The Republican candidate for President running against the Democrat incumbent President. Your choices are one or the other. In the end only one will win.

There's the campaign slogan: "There can be only one."

Of course, that means that Mitt Romney is the next Connor MacLeod.

http://epicepoch.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/highlander.jpg

I was resigned to Romney, but as his campaign starts counterpunching Obama's, I'm finding that I like him a lot more than I did.

Novaheart
05-03-2012, 12:02 PM
Back when RR first got elected he ,in the minds of many,was a weak conservative and "the lesser of two evils".

Not saying Mitt is a RR type but he is the Republican candidate, not an also ran or a should have ran but The Republican candidate for President running against the Democrat incumbent President. Your choices are one or the other. In the end only one will win.

And thanks to the GOP we're stuck with Obama.

Novaheart
05-03-2012, 12:05 PM
If the GOP candidate won't support Right To Carry and won't commit to deporting illegal aliens, then what good is the Republican party?

Rockntractor
05-03-2012, 12:14 PM
And thanks to the GOP we're stuck with Obama.

Not necessarily Nancy, the polls are showing him to have a very good chance, this early in the game Obama should be leading, we haven't had the conventions yet and started full war against the Marxists.

Molon Labe
05-03-2012, 02:14 PM
Not necessarily Nancy, the polls are showing him to have a very good chance, this early in the game Obama should be leading, we haven't had the conventions yet and started full war against the Marxists.

And the really scary thing is that George Soros money hasn't started rolling in yet. And the nasty ads about Bain Capitol. It's gonna be ugly.

Zathras
05-03-2012, 02:31 PM
There's the campaign slogan: "There can be only one."

Of course, that means that Mitt Romney is the next Connor MacLeod.

http://epicepoch.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/highlander.jpg

I was resigned to Romney, but as his campaign starts counterpunching Obama's, I'm finding that I like him a lot more than I did.

Heh heh, if the election was handled the same way as the contest in Highlander, it would be more entertaining. :evil-grin:

mike128
05-03-2012, 06:00 PM
Is this thread a joke?

1) Romney is definitely no Ronald Reagan. Reagan knew where he stood, most of the time. Romney is a habitual flip-flopper without a core.

2) Most would agree that Reagan was a conservative. Romney is just slightly less liberal than Obumbler.

3) Romney might not even win this election. Based on other conservative blogs that I have visited, it looks like the conservative base is sitting this one out.

All the Republican 'establishment' strategists kept saying that we need to nominate a 'moderate' to win in November. Well, we now have that 'moderate' (liberal) nominee that Karl Rove could only dream of. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

Zathras
05-03-2012, 06:47 PM
Is this thread a joke?

Now that you have stuck your faux conservative, Obama supporting nose into it, yes it is.

As for the rest of your obsessive compulsive hatred of all things Romney......

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/HeroesAtWork/deadhorse.jpg

Retread
05-03-2012, 06:50 PM
me too......

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/HeroesAtWork/deadhorse.jpg

JoeKwonDo
05-03-2012, 07:56 PM
I think Mitt Romney is the Next Mitt Romney, I hope he does well.

Touche - I heartily agree

Odysseus
05-03-2012, 09:17 PM
Is this thread a joke?

1) Romney is definitely no Ronald Reagan. Reagan knew where he stood, most of the time. Romney is a habitual flip-flopper without a core.

2) Most would agree that Reagan was a conservative. Romney is just slightly less liberal than Obumbler.

3) Romney might not even win this election. Based on other conservative blogs that I have visited, it looks like the conservative base is sitting this one out.

All the Republican 'establishment' strategists kept saying that we need to nominate a 'moderate' to win in November. Well, we now have that 'moderate' (liberal) nominee that Karl Rove could only dream of. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

Go away.

Arroyo_Doble
05-04-2012, 10:56 AM
If you had said Romney was the next Bill Clinton you'd have hit the nail on the head. Romney is a walking talking boring Robo bot who generates about as much enthusiasm as Bob Dole did.

Flip flopping because you've finally concluded that you were wrong for years is one thing, but Romney held ALL his positions right up to the day he started campaigning for POTUS and his tendancies still seep through if you listen to him enough.

I hate to break the news to you but conservatives and tea partiers are running for the hills from this guy. Why don't you just attend your local GOP meeting and see for yourself.

so lol at this thread

but welcome.

Romney has been tagged as an empty suit whose only obligation is to sign whatever comes out of the Republican Legislative Branch of our government. It remains to be seen if he will push back. I haven't seen him do so yet in the campaign.

Rockntractor
05-04-2012, 05:52 PM
Bumping for Mountingman, I already checked to see if you have the same IP as the OP.

mike128
05-04-2012, 06:59 PM
If you had said Romney was the next Bill Clinton you'd have hit the nail on the head. Romney is a walking talking boring Robo bot who generates about as much enthusiasm as Bob Dole did.

Flip flopping because you've finally concluded that you were wrong for years is one thing, but Romney held ALL his positions right up to the day he started campaigning for POTUS and his tendancies still seep through if you listen to him enough.

I hate to break the news to you but conservatives and tea partiers are running for the hills from this guy. Why don't you just attend your local GOP meeting and see for yourself.

so lol at this thread

but welcome.
You're absolutely right, Molon Labe. But be careful. If you say anything critical or bad about "King Romney", some on this forum might accuse you of secretly working for Obumbler.

I also keep hearing that we have to get Romney in because of Supreme Court appointments. Just take a look at how well Romney's Massachusetts judicial picks are doing for the answer to that.

JB
05-04-2012, 08:50 PM
If you say anything critical or bad about "King Romney", some on this forum might accuse you of secretly working for Obumbler.Good to see you're still breathing Mickey.

Critcizing Romney is not a problem. Being obsessive about it and posting the same thing over and over and over and over and over again kinda rubs the folks on the board the wrong way. Just FYI.

Zathras
05-04-2012, 09:27 PM
You're absolutely right, Molon Labe. But be careful. If you say anything critical or bad about "King Romney", some on this forum might accuse you of secretly working for Obumbler.

Well, when you come on here and voice your support for the liberal Democratic candidate for govenor of California and then obsesively complain about the more conservative GOP candidate running for President it doesn't leave much to the imagination, does it.


I also keep hearing that we have to get Romney in because of Supreme Court appointments. Just take a look at how well Romney's Massachusetts judicial picks are doing for the answer to that.

But you're perfectly happy if Obama gets reelected and leave those appointments to him? Hypocracy, thy name is DUmbass128.

Apache
05-04-2012, 09:48 PM
You're absolutely right, Molon Labe. But be careful. If you say anything critical or bad about "King Romney", some on this forum might accuse you of secretly working for Obumbler.

I also keep hearing that we have to get Romney in because of Supreme Court appointments. Just take a look at how well Romney's Massachusetts judicial picks are doing for the answer to that.

Oh FFS! Grow the fuck up, you pansey assed little weasel! We got a shit sandwich! You seem intent on ordering the corn-chunk shake as well!

Zeus
05-04-2012, 11:27 PM
Romney has been tagged as an empty suit whose only obligation is to sign whatever comes out of the Republican Legislative Branch of our government. It remains to be seen if he will push back. I haven't seen him do so yet in the campaign.

Has any presidential candidate ever "pushed back" against it's party during the primaries or general election.

Gina
05-04-2012, 11:48 PM
If the GOP candidate won't support Right To Carry and won't commit to deporting illegal aliens, then what good is the Republican party?

Bush43 ran on a very unpopular illegal aliens platform. Remember the temporary worker program? He was better than Gore, that's all. See how that works?

Why ask what good is the Republican party? You gonna convert? :biggrin-new:

DumbAss Tanker
05-05-2012, 07:32 AM
Mitt Romney is the Next Ronald Reagan

Extremely unlikely, but considering the alternative, I'll vote for him anyway.

Odysseus
05-05-2012, 12:51 PM
Romney has been tagged as an empty suit whose only obligation is to sign whatever comes out of the Republican Legislative Branch of our government. It remains to be seen if he will push back. I haven't seen him do so yet in the campaign.

Why is it that the possibility that he will actually agree with the policies and positions of his party doesn't seem to penetrate? Are you incapable of accepting that Republicans have core convictions as well as Democrats? Or do you just see us all as brainwashed puppets of Rupert Murdoch?


You're absolutely right, Molon Labe. But be careful. If you say anything critical or bad about "King Romney", some on this forum might accuse you of secretly working for Obumbler.

I also keep hearing that we have to get Romney in because of Supreme Court appointments. Just take a look at how well Romney's Massachusetts judicial picks are doing for the answer to that.

Okay, let's look at his court picks, but in context:


A Look at Romney’s Judicial Philosophy: Conservative Reform in the Most Liberal State

by GARY HOLLIS (http://gopprimary2012.com/author/Gary%20Hollis/) · 5,693 COMMENTS (http://gopprimary2012.com/a-look-at-romneys-judicial-philosophy-conservative-reform-in-the-most-liberal-state/#comments)


In my first post, examining the record of judicial appointments by presidential candidates who served as Governor, I took a look at how Tim Pawlenty shifted the Minnesota Supreme Court to the right (http://gopprimary2012.com/pawlenty%E2%80%99s-minnesota-legacy-a-conservative-high-court/#more-228). In this post, I will examine the judicial record of former Massachusetts governor and front-runner for the Republican nomination, Mitt Romney. Romney’s record of judicial appointments is more complex than Pawlenty’s. His record provides fodder to his critics, who might criticize the selection of several Democrats and Independents to judiciary posts. However, a thorough examination of Romney’s approach to judicial appointments shows that he was committed to integrity of the process, was focused on criminal prosecution, was prudent in his judicial selections, and can be trusted to appoint conservatives to the United States Supreme Court.
Romney Reforms the Process


http://gopprimary2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Romneysigning.jpeg (http://gopprimary2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Romneysigning.jpeg)Mitt Romney signing a bill as Governor of Massachusetts

When Mitt Romney was elected as the 70th governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, he entered office with the unenviable predicament of being a Republican governor, in a state with only 12% of its citizens registered asRepublicans, and having Democrat majorities in both chambers of the Massachusetts legislature. In addition, Romney was faced with the reality that every judicial pick he made as governor would go for approval before the Governor’s Council, where Democrats held 8 of 9 seats. It was going to be extremely difficult for Romney to turn the Massachusetts court system in a more conservative direction.
Romney, who is renowned for his turning around of major companies on the verge of bankruptcy, and for saving the 2002 Olympics, was determined to find some way to bring change to the courts. Romney came up with a partial solution which sought to remove politics from the judicial process completely. He issued an Executive Order (http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/source/mass/eo/eotext/EO470.pdf) reestablishing a Judicial Nominating Commission. The commission would receive resumes of applicants for judicial posts and they would be viewed without certain knowledge of the candidate such as race, sex, or any political leanings. This process, Romney hoped, would result in the selection of the most qualified candidate for the job without regards to any other political or social factor.
Romney’s Judicial Appointments

In 2005, The Boston Globe ran a story on Romney’s judicial appointments. The article stated:
Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.
Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.
This statistic of course provides fodder to Romney’s critics, who might suggest that it would be an indication of the type of judges Romney would appoint as President. Do these statistics indicate favor for Democrat or Independent judges by Romney? Or, do his appointments suggest that Romney was a governor who was pragmatic and tried to make the court system as conservative as he could?
Romney’s own words on the subject might give us more insight into his thinking. Romney defended all of his appointments. He stated that “With regards to those at the district court and clerk magistrate level, their political views aren’t really going to come into play unless their views indicate they will be soft on crime…” Romney stated that his only criteria in picking lower court judges was that they were tough on crime, something he emphasized throughout his time as governor. Romney further elaborated by saying that his criteria would change if an opening were to come on the Massachusetts Supreme Court and then he would focus more on ensuring that the judge had a “strict constructionist, judicial philosophy.”
In addition, Romney’s attempts to turn the Massachusetts courts right can be seen in the appointment of Christopher Moore to chair the Judicial Nominating Commission. Christopher Moore is a conservative who is a member of the Federalist Society, which fights against judicial activism. As chair of the Judicial Nominating Commission, Moore was in an excellent position to ensure he could limit the selection of liberal activist judges who would legislate from the bench.
Romney and the US Supreme Court

Romney has praised the Supreme Court picks of President Bush by saying “President Bush has done a fine job in bringing to the Supreme Court Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.” In addition, Romney described the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, by President Obama, as “troubling.” If taken at his word, these statements would give conservatives a reassuring indication of the types of justices Romney would like sitting on the nation’s high court. In 2004, Romney wrote an editorial in the Wall Street Journal in which he stated “Beware of activist judges” and reinforced the idea that is the job of the legislatures, not the court system, to pass laws.
In spite of his comments, some of Romney’s critics might say that he has shifted positions because he is running for President. However, there is one major icon in the movement for a conservative judiciary who disagree with these critics. Judge Robert Bork, who was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1987 by President Reagan and rejected by the Senate due to his conservative beliefs, endorsed Romney for President in 2008.
“No other candidate will do more to advance the conservative judicial movement than Governor Mitt Romney … Governor Romney is committed to nominating judges who take their oath of office seriously and respect the rule of law in our nation.” -Judge Robert Bork in his 2008 endorsement of Mitt Romney

Conclusion

http://gopprimary2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/RomneyMassachusetts3.jpg (http://gopprimary2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/RomneyMassachusetts3.jpg)
If given a fair look, Romney’s record shows a leader who was determined to move the courts in Massachusetts as far to the right as he could. Romney’s focus on appointing justices who were tough on crime should be applauded. His efforts in creating a judicial nominating commission that would give conservatives a fair chance in a state dominated by liberals was a creative way of achieving the best possible results in difficult circumstances. His appointment of conservative Christopher Moore to chair the Judicial Nominating Commission showed that Romney played his biggest cards where they mattered most. Due to his constant criticism of judicial activism, his statements of support for judges such as Samuel Alito and John Roberts should be taken at face value, as his record gives us very little that would counter those claims. If Romney is elected President, conservatives can count on him to appoint Supreme Court justices which will respect the constitution, rather than legislate from the bench.
http://gopprimary2012.com/a-look-at-romneys-judicial-philosophy-conservative-reform-in-the-most-liberal-state/



Did he manage to get a Scalia or Thomas on the Massachusetts Supreme Court over the objections of a judicial appointment board that was stacked 8:1 with Democrats? No, nor could he. But if the above is accurate, then he did make improvements to the system and managed to turn the courts as far rightward as he could, given the climate of the state.

MountainMan
05-08-2012, 10:58 PM
Bumping for Mountingman, I already checked to see if you have the same IP as the OP.

Oh gee, look at this. I have a Pig-fan follower.... :rolleyes:

With regards to the OP, nobody can replace Ronald Reagan nor should we want to. Men like that come to us maybe once a generation. That being said......

I truly believe that Mitt Romney is going to surprise a lot of you. Of course their are those that claim to be conservative on this board who have a purity test that not even Reagan could have passed but I suspect those people really want Obama reelected anyways.

Rockntractor
05-08-2012, 11:13 PM
Oh gee, look at this. I have a Pig-fan follower.... :rolleyes:

With regards to the OP, nobody can replace Ronald Reagan nor should we want to. Men like that come to us maybe once a generation. That being said......

I truly believe that Mitt Romney is going to surprise a lot of you. Of course their are those that claim to be conservative on this board who have a purity test that not even Reagan could have passed but I suspect those people really want Obama reelected anyways.

I expected more than that, must not have had your latte and biscotti yet.http://planetsmilies.net/confused-smiley-17428.gif (http://planetsmilies.net)

Arroyo_Doble
05-09-2012, 09:56 AM
I truly believe that Mitt Romney is going to surprise a lot of you.

You think he will lose his malleability once in office?

Gina
05-09-2012, 11:05 AM
You're absolutely right, Molon Labe. But be careful. If you say anything critical or bad about "King Romney", some on this forum might accuse you of secretly working for Obumbler.



King Romney? Really? I know I've only been back on CU for a little while but I have yet to see anyone doing cartwheels over Romney. Supporting the candidate you get is different than the ALL HAIL OBAMA we got from the left last time out.