Unity: Two pro-life groups endorse Romney

posted at 11:01 am on April 12, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Now that Rick Santorum has withdrawn from the Republican nomination race, Mitt Romney’s challenge will be to unify the party quickly.  He got plenty of help last night from Hilary Rosen, who attacked Ann Romney for being a stay-at-home mom and created a massive reaction among conservatives rallying to defend her.  Today, two key conservative groups announced endorsements for Romney in a move that may help stoke momentum for the all-but-certain nominee.  First, the conservative women’s group and fundraising organization Susan B. Anthony List came out with a strong message of support:

The Susan B. Anthony List, which endorsed Santorum and campaigned feverishly on his behalf by taking a campaign tour bus across the country, is now supporting the former Massachusetts governor for the GOP nomination to take on pro-abortion President Barack Obama.

“Now is the time to unite behind Governor Romney in order to defeat the most ideologically pro-abortion president in our nation’s history,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of SBA List. “The SBA List is proud to endorse Governor Romney and plans to spend $10 to $12 million in senate and presidential battleground states mobilizing pro-life voters to ensure victory.”

“Women deserve a president who truly respects our views on an issue so central to womanhood,” continued Dannenfelser. “A President Romney will be that man. If there was murkiness during the last election over Barack Obama’s extreme abortion position, absolute clarity exists now – and his abortion position is rejected by women young and old.”

“The difference between Governor Romney and President Obama couldn’t be clearer, which is why our Board of Directors voted unanimously to get behind him,” said Jane Abraham, Chairman of the SBA List Board of Directors. “It is the responsibility of all pro-life voters to now unite behind Governor Romney. Together we can put a pro-life leader in the White House.”

The National Right to Life PAC also announced their endorsement of Romney, and drew stark contrasts between the Republican nominee and the Democratic incumbent:

Determined to secure a pro-life victory in the November election, which will decide the fate of unborn children for decades to come, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of 50 state right-to-life affiliates and more than 3,000 local chapters, today endorsed Mitt Romney for President of the United States.

“On pro-life issues, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama provide a stark contrast. As the country’s most pro-abortion president, Barack Obama has pursued a radical pro-abortion agenda,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “It is now time for pro-life Americans to unite behind Mitt Romney. For the sake of unborn children, the disabled, and the elderly, we must win.”

Mitt Romney has taken a strong pro-life position and is committed to implementing policies to protect the unborn, the medically dependent and disabled, and the elderly.  Romney opposes abortion and has called the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, “a big mistake.” Romney has expressed his support of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortion. …

In comparison, since taking office in January 2009, President Obama has been an outspoken advocate for abortion and has unceasingly worked to expand funding of and access to abortion.  He rescinded the Mexico City Policy, threatened to veto the entire federal spending bill – forcing a government shutdown – rather than accept a provision cutting funding to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. Obama also threatened to veto the Protect Life Act, which would repeal the abortion-expanding provisions of his health care law, and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, which would permanently prohibit any federal program from funding elective abortion.

Romney needs these kinds of endorsements, and as early as he can get them.  SBA List had endorsed Santorum, which makes their quick shift to Romney all the more significant.  The NRLC had refrained from endorsing any specific candidate, claiming that all four Republicans would represent an improvement over Obama, and in fact scolded its Georgia affiliate in February for singling out Santorum and Gingrich.

In that context, this endorsement looks significant indeed.  Gingrich, after all, continues to insist that he’s still in the race — and this morning insisted that he wouldn’t work for Romney even if Gingrich was offered a job, although he’d be happy to advise him:

Newt Gingrich said on Thursday he would “probably not” accept a Cabinet position under a Mitt Romney administration but would be happy to advise the former Massachusetts governor on policy.

Asked the question in an interview with local radio station WILM at the Hollywood Diner, Gingrich, one of three contenders left in the race for the GOP presidential nomination, said he wouldn’t be interested in joining likely nominee Romney’s Cabinet, but added—“not because I am opposed to Mitt.”

“Look, if the choice does end up being Romney versus [President] Obama, I can be very, very enthusiastic for Romney; that is a huge choice,” the former House speaker said. “But I had a very good life doing a lot of fun things: I’m a grandfather, I’ve got two grandchildren I want to spend time with, Callista has got me into being a really bad golfer. I would like to move up from bad to mediocre.”

The quick announcement of both organizations of their support for Romney might be intended not just to boost Romney, but to tell the other Republicans that it’s time to consider other options for their futures.  So far, it doesn’t appear that Gingrich is getting the message.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

More of this to come. Candidates don’t determine elections, voters do. Time to circle the wagons!

TheLoudTalker on April 12, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Tags: conservative women, endorsements, Gingrich, pro-life, romney

You missed ‘dirty filthy RINO’.

/

faraway on April 12, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Hang in there Life!

Electrongod on April 12, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Unity: Two pro-life groups endorse Romney

Oh, yeah? Well the HA35 endorse Obama! Take rhat Mittbots! Now get on your knees and beg us to vote for your satanic squish overlord!

M240H on April 12, 2012 at 11:07 AM

“But I had a very good life doing a lot of fun things: I’m a grandfather, I’ve got two grandchildren I want to spend time with, Callista has got me into being a really bad golfer. I would like to move up from bad to mediocre.”

So why did he run for president to begin with?

changer1701 on April 12, 2012 at 11:08 AM

I would agree that Obama is downright hideous on the issue of abortion. But that NRLC press release on Romney being “strong” on pro-life is a bit embarrassing.

Bitter Clinger on April 12, 2012 at 11:08 AM

More of this to come. Candidates don’t determine elections, voters do. Time to circle the wagons!

TheLoudTalker on April 12, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Yep.

Happy Nomad on April 12, 2012 at 11:08 AM

“But I had a very good life doing a lot of fun things: I’m a grandfather, I’ve got two grandchildren I want to spend time with, Callista has got me into being a really bad golfer. I would like to move up from bad to mediocre.”

Sounds like the old stud horse is pining for the pasture. Good for you, Newt!

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on April 12, 2012 at 11:08 AM

They endorsed this guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt3yoSiwERo

Ohhhh kay.

angryed on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

So how long does Santorum lick his wounds before he mans up and endorses our candidate?

BettyRuth on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Breaking on Drudge….

Michelle Obama didn’t have the luxury not being able to work.

Oil Can to Obama, “Then maybe you should have gotten a real job with your law degree”

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

So far, it doesn’t appear that Gingrich is getting the message.

How foolish he has become. Pay your bills, Newt. You’ve become a complete clown.

Bitter Clinger on April 12, 2012 at 11:10 AM

You missed ‘dirty filthy RINO’.

/

faraway on April 12, 2012 at 11:05 AM

No he didn’t.

Tags: conservative women, endorsements, Gingrich, pro-life, romney

/

KingGold on April 12, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Some people need to decide who is the real enemy: is it Romney or is it Obama? Maybe it will take longer for the high emotions of the primary season to wear off for some of us, but come November, we need to unite behind the GOP nominee (even though it’s Romney) to kick Dear Leader out of office.

DRayRaven on April 12, 2012 at 11:11 AM

KingGold on April 12, 2012 at 11:11 AM

touche

faraway on April 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Breaking on Drudge….

Michelle Obama didn’t have the luxury not being able to work.

Oil Can to Obama, “Then maybe you should have gotten a real job with your law degree”

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Dude, this line of attack they are going to go with is going to blow up in their face!

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Yawn

Is Ed going to pump out a faux “Unity” thread every day from now until the General Election?

I am not voting for Romney, period.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM

So how long does Santorum lick his wounds before he mans up and endorses our candidate?

BettyRuth on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

November 7th?

SouthernGent on April 12, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Breaking on Drudge….

Michelle Obama didn’t have the luxury not being able to work.

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

I know.

What a backbreaking labor, toiling away at a do-nothing graft-funded sinecure, while your husband rakes in cash fighting for ACORN’s voting-fraud initiatives.

KingGold on April 12, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Ed Morrissey said:

So far, it doesn’t appear that Gingrich is getting the message.

ITguy on April 12, 2012 at 11:17 AM

I am not voting for Romney, period.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Obama and liberal judges on the Supreme Court thank you for your support.

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Breaking on Drudge….

Michelle Obama didn’t have the luxury not being able to work.

Oil Can to Obama, “Then maybe you should have gotten a real job with your law degree”

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

The nation weeps for you, Michelle.
/////////

Bitter Clinger on April 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Yawn
Is Ed going to pump out a faux “Unity” thread every day from now until the General Election?
I am not voting for Romney, period.
Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Ditto

Dan Pet on April 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM

I am not voting for Romney, period.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Like Oil Can said…

SCOTUS picks.

Get over yourself

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Message to Obama on Michelle not staying home:

You had two kids. You didn’t need that big of a house! Downsize, learn to live within your means, and maybe Michelle could have “afforded” to stay home with her children. That’s what the rest of us do who put family above power and money. All you’ve done is show me that your priorities are completely out of whack as if I didn’t know that already!

UnderstandingisPower on April 12, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Did you “I’m not voting for Romney” folks learn nothing from what’s currently going down in the SCOTUS over the hell-care bill?

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Dude, this line of attack they are going to go with is going to blow up in their face!

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Yep going after a mother of 5 sons who has MS and had cancer is not what I consider brilliant strategy that’s for sure.

Plus Ann Romney is definitely not someone who is easily villified. The woman just oozes class.

gophergirl on April 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Also, why is it that Democrats are for “choice” until you make the choice they don’t like or agree with (pro-life, stay-at-home mom), then they get all hot and bothered and insult your CHOICE?

UnderstandingisPower on April 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I am not voting for Romney, period.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Your choice but you also lose the right to complain if Obama wins.

gophergirl on April 12, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Hang in there Life!

Electrongod on April 12, 2012 at 11:07 AM

+1

and Oil Can too

DanMan on April 12, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Sco-con ABRtards hardest hit.

Gunlock Bill on April 12, 2012 at 11:25 AM

I would like to see Hillary Rosen take care of five young boys for a full summer, not just keeping them out of trouble but engaged in productive activities.

Good Luck Hillary!

BTW: If Ann had worked in a day care and been paid for that, Hillary would have considered that “work”, but because Mrs. Romney was not paid it was not work? Liberal Logic is an oxymoron.

The Rock on April 12, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Did you “I’m not voting for Romney” folks learn nothing from what’s currently going down in the SCOTUS over the hell-care bill?

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Using my brain is hard.

ABRtard on April 1b, 2012 at 11:xg AM

Gunlock Bill on April 12, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Yep going after a mother of 5 sons who has MS and had cancer is not what I consider brilliant strategy that’s for sure.

Plus Ann Romney is definitely not someone who is easily villified. The woman just oozes class.

gophergirl on April 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

They’re going to paint the Romney’s as evil snobs, and they’re going to use divisive rhetoric based on wealth, and that sh!t is going to blow up in their faces.

The independents aren’t concerned with this sort of rhetorical garbage.

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Yawn
Is Ed going to pump out a faux “Unity” thread every day from now until the General Election?
I am not voting for Romney, period.
Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM
Ditto

Dan Pet on April 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again . . . if the general election comes down to barack versus a dog turd, I will vote for the dog turd.

DuctTapeMyBrain on April 12, 2012 at 11:29 AM

I just keep screwing up my apostrophes.

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Yep going after a mother of 5 sons who has MS and had cancer is not what I consider brilliant strategy that’s for sure.

gophergirl on April 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I didn’t realize she had cancer and MS. I knew nothing of her and I don’t think I’ve heard her speak. I wasn’t a big Mitt fan, but now I support him.

That’s just low….real low.

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Some people need to decide who is the real enemy: is it Romney or is it Obama? Maybe it will take longer for the high emotions of the primary season to wear off for some of us, but come November, we need to unite behind the GOP nominee (even though it’s Romney) to kick Dear Leader out of office.

DRayRaven on April 12, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Until a candidate secures the votes of 1,144 delegates, the battle is for the Republican nomination, many of us are not willing to concede that battle until it is truly over (not just assumed over when one candidate has 1 more than half the number he needs).

Once a candidate secures the votes of 1,144 delegates, the battle is for the Presidency. And yes, I will be voting against Obama.

I’d like to have a candidate that I can vote FOR, enthusiastically.

ITguy on April 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM

I didn’t realize she had cancer and MS. I knew nothing of her and I don’t think I’ve heard her speak. I wasn’t a big Mitt fan, but now I support him.

That’s just low….real low.

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Yep. Even if she didn’t have those things – a SAHM is not someone who should be villified that’s for sure.

gophergirl on April 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Yeah, Romney is pro-life, at least until he wins the nomination. Judging from Romney’s long history of flip-flopping on abortion, it would be unwise to put too much trust in him.

Pork-Chop on April 12, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Obama and liberal judges on the Supreme Court thank you for your support.

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Eh, No. Romney would pick David Souter clones or worse, look at his record from Massachusetts.

Many of Romney’s appointments were not only liberal, not only Democrats, but were radical counter-constitutionalists. How on earth can we expect that, as president, he would be any different?

http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/romney-judicial-record-liberals-running-wild/

The only difference between Obama and Romney is that GOP Senators would be less likely to block a Romney judicial nominee. So a Romney presidency would be WORSE for SCOTUS appoinments than Obama.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I’d like to have a candidate that I can vote FOR, enthusiastically.

ITguy on April 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM

If you’re counting on a brokered convention to deliver your dream candidate, you’re gonna be mighty disappointed. Gotta take things as they are, not as you want them to be.

changer1701 on April 12, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Your choice but you also lose the right to complain if Obama wins.

gophergirl on April 12, 2012 at 11:24 AM

And no offense, but not being able to complain for four years would seriously suck.

Myron Falwell on April 12, 2012 at 11:39 AM

I am not voting for Romney, period.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Another Obama lover heard from.

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Once a candidate secures the votes of 1,144 delegates, the battle is for the Presidency. And yes, I will be voting against Obama. I’d like to have a candidate that I can vote FOR, enthusiastically.

So would I…but we are where we are…as a Santorum supporter I have to admit the handwriting is on the wall…Neither Newt or Paul is not going to deny Romney 1,144 delegates. He is the nominee. The challenge for conservatives is how to continue to hold Romney’s feet to the fire on key conservative issues and be willing to call him out when he waffles. Assuming he becomes President that process has to continue and must be accompanied by the election of a very conservative House and Senate who will not be afraid to stand up to him when necessary.

ironmarshal on April 12, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Also, why is it that Democrats are for “choice” until you make the choice they don’t like or agree…

UnderstandingisPower on April 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Ah, I see you didn’t get your copy of the New Revised Progressive Dictionary yet. See: Choice, Noun \’choiS\ Definition: Abortion

Trafalgar on April 12, 2012 at 11:41 AM

didn’t AnnRomney give to PP?

8 weight on April 12, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Breaking on Drudge….

Michelle Obama didn’t have the luxury not being able to work.

Oil Can to Obama, “Then maybe you should have gotten a real job with your law degree”

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Fat thighs and her teleprompter reader should thank God, or allah, everyday for affirmitive action. Without that, “fries with that”?

msupertas on April 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I am not voting for Romney, period.
Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Ditto
Dan Pet on April 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM

DU is here, anti-Republican hissy fits are the norm there – here it’s just trolling. Go and enjoy.

whatcat on April 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM

The challenge for conservatives is how to continue to hold Romney’s feet to the fire on key conservative issues and be willing to call him out when he waffles

we shouldn’t have to do that. it’s a bad sign that we think we’re going to have to do that.

8 weight on April 12, 2012 at 11:44 AM

didn’t AnnRomney give to PP?

8 weight on April 12, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Yes. Not only did Ann Romney donate to Planned Parenthood, both her and Mitt Romney personally attended fundraisers for the abortion provider.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:45 AM

I am not voting for Romney, period.
Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:13 AM
Ditto
Dan Pet on April 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Tell us what you find so endearing and lovable about Barack Obama?

You sure are enthusiastic about keeping him as your president.

Is it his soaring rhetoric?

That’s gleam in his cheery eyes?

Admit it. You just want to hug him to pieces. Maybe give him a big smooch on the cheek. And so forth . . .

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Yes. Not only did Ann Romney donate to Planned Parenthood, both her and Mitt Romney personally attended fundraisers for the abortion provider.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:45 AM

150 dollars nearly 20 years ago.

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:49 AM

On the threads there is a picture of Ann and of Hilary.
C l a s s and T r a s h!

KOOLAID2 on April 12, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Tell us what you find so endearing and lovable about Barack Obama Mitt Romney?

You sure are enthusiastic about keeping electing him as your president.

Is it his soaring rhetoric?

That’s gleam in his cheery eyes?

Admit it. You just want to hug him to pieces. Maybe give him a big smooch on the cheek. And so forth . . .

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 11:45 AM

FIFY

For the record, I have no use for either man. They’re both liberals with the record to prove it.

My primary concern in 2012 is to elect conservatives to Congress.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:50 AM

didn’t AnnRomney give to PP?

8 weight on April 12, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Man you make it tough. It’s either the guy that was to the left of NARAL that sponsored infanticide legislation in liberal IL. or the guy that flip flopped back to a pro-life stance in liberal MA. How will we ever resolve that tangled web?

DanMan on April 12, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Obama claims they didn’t have the luxury of Michelle not having to work. Interesting, I have served in the military my entire adult life and my wife has primarily raised our 4 kids at home. I doubt it was too hard for them to have a single income home. Im sure it’s touch being a Harvard educated millionaire. We should all feel sorry for them, both lawyers, just trying to get by. What a crock.

Rusty Allen on April 12, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:36 AM

You’re an idiot, the kind of idiot that makes a “Bluegill” seem completely right in some her assessments of TruCon types.

M240H on April 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Thanks, angryed @ 11:09. You helped alot of people who are not for or against abortion definitely vote for Romney. In the videoyou presented Mitt clearly says he would not let his philosophical views interfere with job creation and fiscal matters that effect the economy. He will not force his views on the people if the majority of voters in Massachusetts want the law to stand. Exactly DIFFERENT from Obama pushing every law he wants when it is clearly not what the majority of Americans want. You have presented Romney’s position that is in direct compliance with how a democracy works and not like the dictatorial process of forcing of unwanted laws against the will of the American people as like Obama undoubtedly is doing. Ohh kay?

volsense on April 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Breaking on Drudge….

Michelle Obama didn’t have the luxury not being able to work.

Oil Can to Obama, “Then maybe you should have gotten a real job with your law degree”

Oil Can on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Not sure they really wanted to go there. Wouldn’t want anyone scrutinizing Michelle’s work career too closely. Patient-dumping is kind of frowned upon in polite society.

Dee2008 on April 12, 2012 at 11:53 AM

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 11:45 AM

There’s either three hypothesizes about this line of posting.

1) The poster is either a Democrat plant just to rile people up, and never was intending to vote for a conservative, let alone a Republican.

2) The poster is still coming to that stage of Acceptance among the Five Stages of Grief. Currently some are at Anger, while others are at Bargaining (brokered convention talk).

3) The poster will vote for Mitt, but is just playing around just for the heck of it.

Myron Falwell on April 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Your choice but you also lose the right to complain if Obama wins.

gophergirl on April 12, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Did libtards shut up after the 2010 election? Lucky for freedom of speech you don’t get to make that call.

swinia sutki on April 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM

For the record, I have no use for either man. They’re both liberals with the record to prove it.

My primary concern in 2012 is to elect conservatives to Congress.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Romney is not a liberal. You are simply delusional if you believe that and you cannot be taken at all seriously.

Lot of good Congress will do with Obama at the helm.

He’ll appoint judges who will make abortion mandatory.

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Michelle also didn’t have the luxury of MS and breast cancer.

Rusty Allen on April 12, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Get this family the hell out of the white house.

Rusty Allen on April 12, 2012 at 11:56 AM

For the record, I have no use for either man. They’re both liberals with the record to prove it.

My primary concern in 2012 is to elect conservatives to Congress.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Dude, the two of them couldn’t be any more different.

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/whitepapers/?subsec=137&id=905

blatantblue on April 12, 2012 at 11:56 AM

You’re an idiot, the kind of idiot that makes a “Bluegill” seem completely right in some her assessments of TruCon types.

M240H on April 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM

LOL

Yes, I was wondering when then infantile name calling was going to start.

You Romney supporters sure are insecure with your candidate. If you weren’t, you wouldn’t bother to even respond to me. I am just a single conservative who will not vote for Romney in the fall.

What’s next? Ban me, because I refuse to vote for a liberal Republican? Pathetic.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Myron Falwell on April 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I have no patience with these people. It’s vile enough that they plan on not voting for the candidate with the only shot at defeating Obama, but then they try and get other voters to do the same.

Simply vile. They’re worse than Obama supporters because they know how bad Obama is as a president. Shirking your duty is worse than ignorance.

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Gotta take things as they are, not as you want them to be.

changer1701 on April 12, 2012 at 11:38 AM

And I say the same to you. Romney has 573 delegates that are either pledged to him, or have publicly stated that they will vote for him. He is a long way from 1,144.

If Romney fails to get a majority of the vote in PA, even after Santorum has suspended his campaign, that will look very bad for Romney, even if he “wins” a plurality. If the Not-Romney vote remains in the majority, even after EVERY conceivable advantage has been given to Romney, that sends a very strong message of Republican Primary electorate discontent with the “presumptive” Romney.

If the not-Romney vote coalesces around a candidate other than Romney, it is possible that a not-Romney could actually win one or more big “winner-takes-all” states. That would send shockwaves through the current meme. I’m not predicting what will happen, I’m just saying that if Romney stays in the low 40′s, it’s a possibility that should not be completely ignored. Let things play out and we’ll see what happens.

When a candidate, regardless of who that candidate is, secures the vote of 1,144 pledged or verbally committed delegates, then I will recognize that candidate as the Republican nominee. But don’t ask me to recognize Romney as the Republican nominee when he has only 1 more than half of the number he needs, and he hasn’t won a majority in any state that
a) wasn’t his home state,
b) included Santorum and Gingrich on the ballot, and
c) wasn’t a state with a substantial % of the electorate being Morman
(not being bigoted… just recognizing that that is an important part of his base).

ITguy on April 12, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Did libtards shut up after the 2010 election? Lucky for freedom of speech you don’t get to make that call.

swinia sutki on April 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM

That’s the primary problem. Conservatives think rationally. Liberals think with emotion, and as such, they get hopelessly deranged to the point of no return.

Quite a few Dems probably hate Obama’s guts, but will vote for him anyway because he is the card-carrier for the liberal (socalist) cause.

Myron Falwell on April 12, 2012 at 12:02 PM

What’s next? Ban me, because I refuse to vote for a liberal Republican? Pathetic.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Oh now your a poor widdle victim. Maybe you can get Sharpton and Jackson to march for you.

I’m supposing you don’t have a children or a family you care about and are fine with entrusting Obama to another four years.

Just huddle in your basement, listen to your little talk shows and don’t vote. But you’re going to be questioned if you try and persaude other voters to sit at home and re-elect Obama.

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM

But you’re going to be questioned if you try and persaude other voters to sit at home and re-elect Obama.
NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM

As I said, such would be welcomed at DU, Kos and HuffPo. They have no valid excuse for going on about it here.

whatcat on April 12, 2012 at 12:07 PM

They endorsed this guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt3yoSiwERo

Ohhhh kay.

angryed on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Thanks, angryed @ 11:09. You helped alot of people who are not for or against abortion definitely vote for Romney. In the videoyou presented Mitt clearly says he would not let his philosophical views interfere with job creation and fiscal matters that effect the economy. He will not force his views on the people if the majority of voters in Massachusetts want the law to stand. Exactly DIFFERENT from Obama pushing every law he wants when it is clearly not what the majority of Americans want. You have presented Romney’s position that is in direct compliance with how a democracy works and not like the dictatorial process of forcing of unwanted laws against the will of the American people as like Obama undoubtedly is doing. Ohh kay?

volsense on April 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Romney made it clear that he would be “status quo” on abortion. Would that mean that if he got to pick a replacement for a “Pro-choice” Supreme Court Justice that he would nominate another “Pro-choice” Justice, in order to maintain the “status quo” on the Supreme Court?

Serious question.

ITguy on April 12, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Once a candidate secures the votes of 1,144 delegates, the battle is for the Presidency. And yes, I will be voting against Obama.

I’d like to have a candidate that I can vote FOR, enthusiastically.

ITguy on April 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM

maybe next time … but I agree …

conservative tarheel on April 12, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I’m supposing you don’t have a children or a family you care about and are fine with entrusting Obama to another four years.

Just huddle in your basement, listen to your little talk shows and don’t vote. But you’re going to be questioned if you try and persaude other voters to sit at home and re-elect Obama.

NoDonkey on April 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Yawn again.

Like I said I am concentrating on getting Conservatives elected to Congress. In MY opinion, Romney is no better than Obama. I live in swing state (Colorado), so I know my vote will count.

Call me names, hurl insults at me, etc. I don’t care. I am not going to change or shut up.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Oh, yeah? Well the HA35 endorse Obama! Take rhat Mittbots! Now get on your knees and beg us to vote for your satanic squish overlord!

M240H on April 12, 2012 at 11:07 AM

..I am in awe of your repeated ability to make me trash my monitor and keyboard with caffeinated beverage spray, sir or madam as the case may be.

The War Planner on April 12, 2012 at 12:23 PM

There’s either three hypothesizes about this line of posting.
Myron Falwell on April 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM

4) Emotional basketcases using the internet to vent.

whatcat on April 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Call me names, hurl insults at me, etc. I don’t care. I am not going to change or shut up.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I notice you did not deny that you do not have children.

The lack of any children they give a damn about is the common characteristic of all of you They Are Just The Same “conservatives” who plan to let Obama wreck the country.

fadetogray on April 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Name calling is for frustrated folks that hold an untenable losing position. Lockstep has never been a good idea historically.

Bmore on April 12, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Oh, I should add, unless troll hunting is involved, then all bets are off.

Bmore on April 12, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I notice you did not deny that you do not have children.

The lack of any children they give a damn about is the common characteristic of all of you They Are Just The Same “conservatives” who plan to let Obama wreck the country.

fadetogray on April 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Nice try. I am married with 2 sons.

For the record, my wife shares my view of Romney.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Sorry, Romney had a chance to show he could pick conservative judges to put on the bench. Romney did the opposite, proudly nominating progressives to the bench!

astonerii on April 12, 2012 at 12:41 PM

I notice you did not deny that you do not have children.
The lack of any children they give a damn about is the common characteristic of all of you They Are Just The Same “conservatives” who plan to let Obama wreck the country.
fadetogray on April 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Nice try. I am married with 2 sons.
For the record, my wife shares my view of Romney.
Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM

I have 6 kids under 10. I’m voting against GOP and Dem statism for them. I’d rather struggle a little now so that they may have a chance to come of age in a free America.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM

When given the opportunity for the self admittedly progressive, even to the left of Teddy Kennedy, to show that he can pick conservative judges, Willard Mitt Romney instead chose to create an Executive Order 445 to create the first in the nation NON-POLITICAL Judicial Nominating Commission. Romney was not pressured to do this, Romney chose to do it and is proud of his action there.

astonerii on April 12, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Sorry, Romney had a chance to show he could pick conservative judges to put on the bench. Romney did the opposite, proudly nominating progressives to the bench!

astonerii on April 12, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Yep. And he will do so again if given the chance.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Romney is proud of the commission’s outcome as well. Romney appointed progressive people to this self created commission who picked progressives, and Romney nominated those progressives to the bench. The benches that future Supreme Court appointees will be chosen from. Romney damaged any opportunity a future conservative Governor of the state might have in nominating conservative judges to the Supreme Court in Massachusetts. When asked if Romney knew he nominated two extremist progressive activist pro-gay agenda judges to the bench he proudly declared that he never looked at the judges backgrounds with regard to their agenda.

astonerii on April 12, 2012 at 12:48 PM

People with CONVICTION achieve RESULTS, those who COMPROMISE achieve NOTHING.

Our founding fathers have NOT compromised, anyone stupid enough to settle for “our best shot” will only help Hussein’s re-election. Anyone care to recall how “compromising” has worked for Russia and China in times of revolution? Its more than astounding to see supposedly educated people not knowing recent history and outcomes of “settling” and “compromising”. Ask 43M Russians who perished and who knows how tens of millions of Chinese when they “compromised” and “settled”.

When a choice is between a progressive liberal and a communist I see it as no choice at all. Nice family pictures don’t do it for me, sorry. Churchill would not fit that mold and yet… I really don’t give a crap about one’s family life, etc, its what he or she is willing to do for their country and people that counts. Its called CONVICTION. Something that Romney has never had nor will. EVER.

Feel free to vote for your “compromise” candidate, just don’t cry on Nov 7th when he concedes with “I tried” speech, 2008 was and should still be a great reminder of “compromise candidate”. If one can’t recall events from just 3+ years ago, then maybe one should not vote in 2012, you guys gave us Hussein last time and will give us Hussein this time as well. Bet on it.

riddick on April 12, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Call me names, hurl insults at me, etc. I don’t care. I am not going to change or shut up.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Yeah, they’re both in CULTS!

And if Romney were really different from Obama he would have flip flopped on Abortion and became Pro Life BUT NO HES A LIBERAL.

Swerve22 on April 12, 2012 at 12:49 PM

In an unprecedented move, Romney failed to fill at least 14 judicial seats, leaving them to the Democrat successor to fill. Some here have claimed that it was because Romney was disgusted by the appointees he was forced, apparently by himself, to appoint. I say it is because Romney does not see the Judicial branch as important enough for him to put any effort into, particularly when Romney is busy running for president.

astonerii on April 12, 2012 at 12:51 PM

You’re an idiot, the kind of idiot that makes a “Bluegill” seem completely right in some her assessments of TruCon types.

M240H on April 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM

LOL

Yes, I was wondering when then infantile name calling was going to start.

You Romney supporters sure are insecure with your candidate. If you weren’t, you wouldn’t bother to even respond to me. I am just a single conservative who will not vote for Romney in the fall.

What’s next? Ban me, because I refuse to vote for a liberal Republican? Pathetic.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:00 PM

The infantile name calling began the day Mitt announced he was running. When those of us who support him fought back the ABRs whined at being called names.

And no, you should not be banned. We need people like you for entertainment. And it’s kind of nice to be able to use the word MORON and know it’s completely justified.

Basilsbest on April 12, 2012 at 12:57 PM

I have 6 kids under 10. I’m voting against GOP and Dem statism for them. I’d rather struggle a little now so that they may have a chance to come of age in a free America.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Tsk, tsk. You are ruining the Mittbot Meme.

Didn’t you get the memo? Those who don’t fall in line and vote for Mitt “My views are progressive” Romney are all supposed to be childless and single or something. Oh, and we are also “idiots” and “vile”.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Nice try. I am married with 2 sons.

For the record, my wife shares my view of Romney.

Norwegian on April 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM

I have 6 kids under 10. I’m voting against GOP and Dem statism for them. I’d rather struggle a little now so that they may have a chance to come of age in a free America.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Then I feel sorry for all eight of your children. Having parents so wrapped up in themselves they cannot see voting is not about them, but about which man is going to have the power, has got to be rough.

fadetogray on April 12, 2012 at 12:59 PM

When those of us who support him fought back the ABRs whined at being called names.

Basilsbest on April 12, 2012 at 12:57 PM

At least you admit that you’ve had to rely on brain dead name calling from the start since there is no defense for Romney’s record.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Then I feel sorry for all eight of your children. Having parents so wrapped up in themselves they cannot see voting is not about them, but about which man is going to have the power, has got to be rough.

fadetogray on April 12, 2012 at 12:59 PM

I feel sorry for any kids that you may have, having a parent who wants to cripple them with an overbearing nanny state for the rest of their lives.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Romney made it clear that he would be “status quo” on abortion. Would that mean that if he got to pick a replacement for a “Pro-choice” Supreme Court Justice that he would nominate another “Pro-choice” Justice, in order to maintain the “status quo” on the Supreme Court?

Serious question.

ITguy on April 12, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Do you know who Robert Bork is? There’s your answer as to who Mitt will nominate.

Basilsbest on April 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM

“But I had a very good life doing a lot of fun things: I’m a grandfather, I’ve got two grandchildren I want to spend time with, Callista has got me into being a really bad golfer. I would like to move up from bad to mediocre.”

So why did he run for president to begin with?

changer1701 on April 12, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Apparently, the same reason as Obama: he wants to improve his golf game.

BlueCollarAstronaut on April 12, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Do you know who Robert Bork is? There’s your answer as to who Mitt will nominate.

Basilsbest on April 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM

I’ll give you this: you’ve gone all in on the Kool Aid. If Romney wins, I sure hope you prove to be an oracle.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 1:07 PM

When those of us who support him fought back the ABRs whined at being called names.

Basilsbest on April 12, 2012 at 12:57 PM

At least you admit that you’ve had to rely on brain dead name calling from the start since there is no defense for Romney’s record.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM

The ABRs called Mitt everything from a pig to a dog and lied about his record. They then whined when we fought back. ABRIOs – Anybody But Romney, Including Obama – are not just morons, but stupid morons.

Basilsbest on April 12, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I feel sorry for any kids that you may have, having a parent who wants to cripple them with an overbearing nanny state for the rest of their lives.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM

That is a total logic fail. Voting to defeat the guy I think will bring on the nanny state sooner does not mean I want to cripple my children with an overbearing nanny state.

On the other hand, your willingness to let Obama appoint USSC Justices and wield his veto pen against anything Congress may try to do (or undo) would be mindboggling if I actually thought you guys were conservatives.

fadetogray on April 12, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I’ll give you this: you’ve gone all in on the Kool Aid. If Romney wins, I sure hope you prove to be an oracle.

besser tot als rot on April 12, 2012 at 1:07 PM

They really don’t get how brain washed they are.

riddick on April 12, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2