Jump to content

Do Any Republicans Want To Call Romney For His Parting Shot?


HolyMoses
 Share

Recommended Posts

"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win," he said during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

Thanks #####: So far this year, Democrats consistently outvoted Republicans. In Missouri, a classic bellweather state, Democrats cast 20% more votes. Yet Romney has now labeled every single one of such voters as "aiding a surrender to terror."

Is that the tone? Is that how we unite America?

How long are we going to continue to demonize those with a different opinion on what is best for America?

If this is the sort of man Romney is, I'm glad he's out of the race.

SO: Are they any Republicans who will condemn the statement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

savwboy savwboy (2/7/2008)
That is all this board is , take your best shot at the other guy.

Why are you so surprised?? That is politics afterall. I have seen you take some shots at the other side, and yet, you act surprised..

Romney is a creep anyway,just like the rest of the GOP field..

I was pretty harsh on Hillary a couple of weeks ago, but that was because she and Bill were taking cheap shots at Obama. I went to their level.

I try to keep my points in good faith and I try to respect alternative positions.

Yes, there will always be people advocating for their chosen path, but if we can at least agree that we all have common goals, we will maintain respect and that is a huge step towards unity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

savwboy savwboy (2/7/2008)
Let me clear that up..

There is no such thing as unity in politics , every man is going to fight for his beliefs..

btw . . . If you think we should hold politicians to the standards of this board, we're in deep trouble (or no wonder we're in deep trouble!)

I'm not running for President.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

savwboy savwboy (2/7/2008)
Let me clear that up..

There is no such thing as unity in politics , every man is going to fight for his beliefs..

I fail to see where the cheapshot is myself?? I re mind you I am no fan of Romney!!

Obama has said he will withdraw the troops and bring them home..Where is the cheapshot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

holymoses (2/7/2008)
savwboy savwboy (2/7/2008)
Let me clear that up..

There is no such thing as unity in politics , every man is going to fight for his beliefs..

btw . . . If you think we should hold politicians to the standards of this board, we're in deep trouble (or no wonder we're in deep trouble!)

I'm not running for President.

I did not say that..Just practice what you preach.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

holymoses (2/7/2008)
"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win," he said during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

Thanks #####: So far this year, Democrats consistently outvoted Republicans. In Missouri, a classic bellweather state, Democrats cast 20% more votes. Yet Romney has now labeled every single one of such voters as "aiding a surrender to terror."

Is that the tone? Is that how we unite America?

How long are we going to continue to demonize those with a different opinion on what is best for America?

If this is the sort of man Romney is, I'm glad he's out of the race.

SO: Are they any Republicans who will condemn the statement?

Obama has said he will bring the troops home right away (aka) tuck our tails and run (aka) surrender. This may not be how you look at it, but it is how a great many of your fellow Americans look at his policy. Romney obviously agrees with this assessment and did not do the typical politician shuffle on it, but rather expressed his opinion without mincing words. This is to be commended, not condemned. You complain about people demonizing others with differing opinions while doing the same thing yourself.

Meanwhile, we all get screwed. The Republicans lost their last, best hope in Romney and are now stuck with McCain. Democrats have the equally idiotic (and painfully similar) policies of Hillary and Obama to choose between. Whoever wins, we all lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

silentbob1272 (2/8/2008)
holymoses (2/7/2008)
"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win," he said during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

Thanks #####: So far this year, Democrats consistently outvoted Republicans. In Missouri, a classic bellweather state, Democrats cast 20% more votes. Yet Romney has now labeled every single one of such voters as "aiding a surrender to terror."

Is that the tone? Is that how we unite America?

How long are we going to continue to demonize those with a different opinion on what is best for America?

If this is the sort of man Romney is, I'm glad he's out of the race.

SO: Are they any Republicans who will condemn the statement?

Obama has said he will bring the troops home right away (aka) tuck our tails and run (aka) surrender. This may not be how you look at it, but it is how a great many of your fellow Americans look at his policy. Romney obviously agrees with this assessment and did not do the typical politician shuffle on it, but rather expressed his opinion without mincing words. This is to be commended, not condemned. You complain about people demonizing others with differing opinions while doing the same thing yourself.

Meanwhile, we all get screwed. The Republicans lost their last, best hope in Romney and are now stuck with McCain. Democrats have the equally idiotic (and painfully similar) policies of Hillary and Obama to choose between. Whoever wins, we all lose.

What terror are we surrendering to? If anything, Bush tucked his tail and ran when it came to Bin Laden. How about we go after the actual ##### who ATTACKED us, and not a country who most likely wasn't involved in the initial instigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ATLBrave12 (2/8/2008)
silentbob1272 (2/8/2008)
holymoses (2/7/2008)
"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win," he said during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

Thanks #####: So far this year, Democrats consistently outvoted Republicans. In Missouri, a classic bellweather state, Democrats cast 20% more votes. Yet Romney has now labeled every single one of such voters as "aiding a surrender to terror."

Is that the tone? Is that how we unite America?

How long are we going to continue to demonize those with a different opinion on what is best for America?

If this is the sort of man Romney is, I'm glad he's out of the race.

SO: Are they any Republicans who will condemn the statement?

Obama has said he will bring the troops home right away (aka) tuck our tails and run (aka) surrender. This may not be how you look at it, but it is how a great many of your fellow Americans look at his policy. Romney obviously agrees with this assessment and did not do the typical politician shuffle on it, but rather expressed his opinion without mincing words. This is to be commended, not condemned. You complain about people demonizing others with differing opinions while doing the same thing yourself.

Meanwhile, we all get screwed. The Republicans lost their last, best hope in Romney and are now stuck with McCain. Democrats have the equally idiotic (and painfully similar) policies of Hillary and Obama to choose between. Whoever wins, we all lose.

What terror are we surrendering to? If anything, Bush tucked his tail and ran when it came to Bin Laden. How about we go after the actual ##### who ATTACKED us, and not a country who most likely wasn't involved in the initial instigation.

I'll not get into the debate on whether or not going into Iraq was a good move in the war on terror or not, you have been very clear on where you stand on the issue. I'm not going to agree with you and you are not going to agree with me, but it really makes no difference whatsoever at this point as to if it was the right decision or not. We are in the fight, Obama has stated (to thunderous Dem applause) that he is not committed to beating back the terrorist in Iraq (once again, not a debate on if they were there before, they are most assuredly there now). He is committed to getting out as soon as he is elected, to many this equals running and surrendering, similar to what Clinton did in Somalia and we saw how well that policy served us. Romney voiced this opinion in the way that it should have been said, not political or nice, but direct and to the point. If you disagree with his assessment... fine, but he has nothing to apologize for and he said nothing that Republicans as a whole should feel obligated to condemn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's real easy to sit at home here in the US and talk about staying the course. It takes a real leader to stay in the safety of their home sprouting propaganda when it's another person who is paying the real price. And it's especially troubling to see people who, instead of admitting a mistake, would rather close their eyes and have their brothers and sisters "stay the course".

Seriously, at what point do we say, enough is enough?

BTW, I know I went on a tangent there, but what Romney said was just downright dirty.

Surrender to terror... give me a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Republicans want to keep poor children from being educated, want to deny them life-saving health care, and want them to starve to death from poverty. Republicans want poor children to die.

Sure, some Republicans view welfare as beyond the proper scope and nature of government action, and they believe that the private sector can better handle poverty issues. I won't get into a debate about whether welfare spending should increase or decrease, and conservatives have made clear that they want it decreased, but the result of less funding is that poor children will die.

Yet, if a Democrat accused Republicans want wanting to kill poor children then most GOPers on these boards would view it as a cheap shot and playing on people's fears. Yet that is precisely how a large number of Americans would view cutting off welfare funding.

Romney's "surrender to terrorism" comment is no different than a Democrat saying that GOPers want to "kill poor children". It's demagoguery and cheap politics, pure and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ramen (2/8/2008)

Romney's "surrender to terrorism" comment is no different than a Democrat saying that GOPers want to "kill poor children". It's demagoguery and cheap politics, pure and simple.

I agree...

And Democrats want unborn babies to die.

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTA (2/8/2008)
Ramen (2/8/2008)

Romney's "surrender to terrorism" comment is no different than a Democrat saying that GOPers want to "kill poor children". It's demagoguery and cheap politics, pure and simple.

I agree...

And Democrats want unborn babies to die.

:P

Another fine example of demagoguery. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ramen (2/8/2008)
Republicans want to keep poor children from being educated, want to deny them life-saving health care, and want them to starve to death from poverty. Republicans want poor children to die.

Sure, some Republicans view welfare as beyond the proper scope and nature of government action, and they believe that the private sector can better handle poverty issues. I won't get into a debate about whether welfare spending should increase or decrease, and conservatives have made clear that they want it decreased, but the result of less funding is that poor children will die.

Yet, if a Democrat accused Republicans want wanting to kill poor children then most GOPers on these boards would view it as a cheap shot and playing on people's fears. Yet that is precisely how a large number of Americans would view cutting off welfare funding.

Romney's "surrender to terrorism" comment is no different than a Democrat saying that GOPers want to "kill poor children". It's demagoguery and cheap politics, pure and simple.

great post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll not get into the debate on whether or not going into Iraq was a good move in the war on terror or not, you have been very clear on where you stand on the issue. I'm not going to agree with you and you are not going to agree with me, but it really makes no difference whatsoever at this point as to if it was the right decision or not. We are in the fight, Obama has stated (to thunderous Dem applause) that he is not committed to beating back the terrorist in Iraq (once again, not a debate on if they were there before, they are most assuredly there now). He is committed to getting out as soon as he is elected, to many this equals running and surrendering, similar to what Clinton did in Somalia and we saw how well that policy served us. Romney voiced this opinion in the way that it should have been said, not political or nice, but direct and to the point. If you disagree with his assessment... fine, but he has nothing to apologize for and he said nothing that Republicans as a whole should feel obligated to condemn.

Isn't it the Republicans who seem to be falling all over themselves to be like the man who was the originator of the "Surrender to Terror" doctrine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTA (2/8/2008)
Ramen (2/8/2008)

Romney's "surrender to terrorism" comment is no different than a Democrat saying that GOPers want to "kill poor children". It's demagoguery and cheap politics, pure and simple.

I agree...

And Democrats want unborn babies to die.

:P

Oh NO we don't! We KILL 'em!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

holymoses (2/7/2008)
"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win," he said during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

Thanks #####: So far this year, Democrats consistently outvoted Republicans. In Missouri, a classic bellweather state, Democrats cast 20% more votes. Yet Romney has now labeled every single one of such voters as "aiding a surrender to terror."

Is that the tone? Is that how we unite America?

How long are we going to continue to demonize those with a different opinion on what is best for America?

If this is the sort of man Romney is, I'm glad he's out of the race.

SO: Are they any Republicans who will condemn the statement?

Condemn it? roflmao!!! Does a guy leaving the race need to be condemned? Get over it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

kicker23 (2/8/2008)
holymoses (2/7/2008)
"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win," he said during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

Thanks #####: So far this year, Democrats consistently outvoted Republicans. In Missouri, a classic bellweather state, Democrats cast 20% more votes. Yet Romney has now labeled every single one of such voters as "aiding a surrender to terror."

Is that the tone? Is that how we unite America?

How long are we going to continue to demonize those with a different opinion on what is best for America?

If this is the sort of man Romney is, I'm glad he's out of the race.

SO: Are they any Republicans who will condemn the statement?

Condemn it? roflmao!!! Does a guy leaving the race need to be condemned? Get over it.

Yeah, I was sort of thinking about that. Good point. Maybe if he was speaking for the Party he wouldn't be making a concession speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

XLDenaliReturns (2/8/2008)
keep it up, mitt. all you're doing is handing the election over to the democrats (not that it wasn't theirs to lose in the first place).

people aren't buying that fear-mongering crap anymore, and they're sick of US soldiers getting blown up so the incompetent Iraqis can experiment around with "freedom".

why do you hate the troops?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thesouphead (2/8/2008)
XLDenaliReturns (2/8/2008)
keep it up, mitt. all you're doing is handing the election over to the democrats (not that it wasn't theirs to lose in the first place).

people aren't buying that fear-mongering crap anymore, and they're sick of US soldiers getting blown up so the incompetent Iraqis can experiment around with "freedom".

why do you hate the troops?

why, because i'm a yellow-bellied, liberal, cut-n-runnin', surrender monkey! oh, and i wet the bed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

holymoses (2/7/2008)
"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win," he said during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

Thanks #####: So far this year, Democrats consistently outvoted Republicans. In Missouri, a classic bellweather state, Democrats cast 20% more votes. Yet Romney has

now labeled every single one of such voters as "aiding a surrender to terror."

Is that the tone? Is that how we unite America?

How long are we going to continue to demonize those with a different opinion on what is best for America?

If this is the sort of man Romney is, I'm glad he's out of the race.

SO: Are they any Republicans who will condemn the statement?

Romney sees into my soul. As I made my selection, my one thought was, "Economy be damned, who will carry out my wish that we surrender to terror?"

I already ranted about his speech in another thread. It doesn't matter if anyone condemns that statement. We've already learned that no one in this race is above attempted character assasination and fear mongering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...