See also this, this, and this.

I agree that Romney HAS to be supported if he becomes the nominee but until that happens I would suggest that stiftening the opposition in the primaries is still worth the fight.

Interesting proposition.

Is Romney better for America than Obama ?

When Obama was first elected I saw through him right away having worked politically against just such a “snake oil salesman” in a developing country. I said at the time that he was no more competent that a first year student in politics 101 in any Third World Country. So said so proven.

I also said that it was much better to have Obama as President than Hillary Clinton because sho would ensure the “one step forward, two steps backward” dance of conservatism in your USA. Obama on the other hand would expose the failure of leftists policies particularly for the past 60 years. Again so proven. Obama was the genesis of the Tea Party movement and caused the great awareness of your Constitution and Declaration of Independence – so vital to your success.

Would that argument still hold for Obama /Romney?

It galls me when American Catholics and even those in the top echelon of the curia itself abandon our Judeo Christian principles for the politically correct dogma of the left’s religion.

Does America still need to fall further with Obama to come to their senses rather than a slow dance to the cliff face with Romney ?

And of course I disagree with a great deal of your description of Romney and his positions, but I doubt very much that any fact would change your mind.

The sundering of Western Civilization has to do with the undermining of our Judeo Christian culture, tradition ethic. Note that this affects me in my country as much as North Americans or Europeans.

The undermining of the family and social norms by liberals/leftists/progressives/socialists is fundamental to the mayham taking place and it is not only about economic issues as some like to think.

Now.

Do you think Romney will stand up for conservative positions ( in rabidly liberal Washington DC where 93% of journalists are card carrying liberal supporters) unless he sees it impacting a 2nd term ? I think not?

Do you think Romney is willing to make the hard decisions on welfare and federal expenditures when faced with the backlash from victim groups and lobbyists he wants to appease? I think not.

Do you think the liberal 70th Governor of Massachusetts, author of Romneycare and pro abortionist is going to run the USA as a liberal President or will it be the faux conservative who has merrily flip flopped his way through the Republican primary ?

Do you think that Romney will stand up for marriage in any other way than like Obama for whom marriage is just a political issue to help or hinder his election prospects? I think not.

Relative to conservative issues Romney is no different than Cameron in the UK. Their eyes have only been on the prize of Prime Ministership or the Presidency. They have no commitments to what is right for the UK or the US but what is right for themselves and their personla agenda.

That Romney is no Thatcher, no Reagan , no Jack Kemp is obvious.

He is in the mold of an Obama, Scott Brown, John Kerry or Olympia Snow.

If that is what you think will take the US out of its morass then so be it !

I can agree with her that my positions need more backup but it won’t happen here for a couple reasons mostly to do with time.

This is a blog and I simply do not have the time as I am working on a book on a similiar set of issues, am not an American and do not have time to expound on the obvious plus have to deal with the same “head in the sand” liberal environment in my country that supports the ineffective and RINO policies of a Romney. Neo simply cannot see the perils facing your society and while applauding her for her blog and approach I am sorry that she is so unrealistic.

I have read Neo’s editorial rejoinder to Joseph and simply don’t get her beef with him.

I will vote against BHO, but I will not fool myself into believing in “hope and change”. Anyone but BHO is merely a pause to take a deep breath.

There are lots of comments out there already this am, claiming that the press misrepresented Santorum’s statement when they asked him about it – that they knew Santorum was speaking in the context of Romney being “uniquely unqualified to go against Obama because of Obamacare” – which may in fact be the true context of Santorum’s speech, but totally misses the point of what the video reveals – his temperament.

Santorum can’t expect the press or the “loyal opposition” (or other nations leaders, for that matter) to “play by the rules as he see it”. It’s just not going to happen. He has to be able to handle it and not lose his cool. And he can’t seem to do that. He keeps flaring up. That, to me, is an ominous sign.

Up until now, I’ve appreciated the fact that Santorum has been a reminder to Romney that he needs to say something other “I would be a good President”, but now I think he’s become not only a liability to himself, which is fairly benign in the context of defeating Obama, but a liability to Republicans as a whole. He’s making “good” the enemy of “less bad” and doing a bang-up job of campaigning for Obama. The fact that he either doesn’t realize this, or doesn’t care is further evidence of my original thesis that Santorum just isn’t smart enough to campaign against Obama (and that’s not even considering the job he’s trying to apply for).

Romney may not be very good as inspiring people. He certainly doesn’t inspire me. But at least he’s capable of speaking without doing himself or his party damage. Santorum clearly is not.

I’m not exactly sure.

We’ll need land to farm, lots of cash reserves, no debt, etc. We’ll need to exercise and be in shape, secure facilities, family and friends, etc.

The only thing you can trust is what you can touch. The only people you can count on is people who’s words mean things.