Posted on 04/03/2012 6:49:25 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
If Mass people could fix Romney problems they would have.
Nope, this guy has to step out of the race.
Here we go again, as America lay near dead on the floor, after several decades of this same *stategery* and wholesale sham.
Well, Butthead (I'm sure you won't mine if I call you that), here's my opinion: The only one who wins if you don't "play" in November and vote against him is Obama.
And if that's your strategy, as a Conservative I ask you to stop using that adjective to describe yourself. NO true Conservative takes his or her marbles home to clear a path for an Obama second term.
I have no illusions this election cycle. For me it’s about one thing and one thing only - getting rid of the communist thug ghetto Marxist baby doc barack in the WH.
It would also be difficult to vote for a man who expects to work himself into a god. It would also be hard to vote for a Mormon who has a code word for his spouse or spouses (in some cases)and her only way of attaining heaven is when she is called by her spouse by her secret code name.
However, more importantly, it will be extremely difficult to vote for a Mormon who claims that Mormonism is Christian, although they do not believe in the Blessed Trinity.
Also, considering Romney Care was the model for ObamaCare, can Romney be trusted to work to repeal Obamacare.
Romney also supported homosexual marriage in Massachusetts.
What a dilemma, a Democrat president who thinks he is smarter than God and a Republican moderate who believes he will become a god.
Has Romney ever been asked about his magic underwear?
It would also be difficult to vote for a man who expects to work himself into a god. It would also be hard to vote for a Mormon who has a code word for his spouse or spouses (in some cases)and her only way of attaining heaven is when she is called by her spouse by her secret code name.
However, more importantly, it will be extremely difficult to vote for a Mormon who claims that Mormonism is Christian, although they do not believe in the Blessed Trinity.
Also, considering Romney Care was the model for ObamaCare, can Romney be trusted to work to repeal Obamacare.
Romney also supported homosexual marriage in Massachusetts.
What a dilemma, a Democrat president who thinks he is smarter than God and a Republican moderate who believes he will become a god.
That, BTW, is Romney's main problem ~ the worker bees ~ they and the base are not behind him.
When it comes to Romney there is no there there!
The Republican Party deserves every bit of the political destruction that is about to fall on their heads.
(We noticed...and you apparently sold your soul pretty cheap...all it took was a clean-cut looking "I'm a god" Mormon who told Katie Couric the womb is a donate-able commodity & imported socialized healthcare into the only thing he's governed)
We are picking the lesser of two evils, and yes, Romney , even if not by much, is better than Obama.
Yeah...and when, in 2036, your "fave party" runs a candidate to the left of Obama, your kids & grandkids will remember your sage advice: "Always vote 'fave party' vs. the 'D' guy...'cause he's 'less liberal.'"
(Boy. No POTUS voter will ever need to think again with that type of robotic everlasting advice...just check the 'r' guy in the gen election)
After the Nixon loss in 1960 Goldwater did a fantastic job of organizing and taking over the Republican party in many states. He had people loyal to him in control.http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1647486/posts?page=18#18But what his people did was just plain stupid. They did their best to rid the party of RINOs. The honestly believed as did Goldwater that 35 percent of the voters could cast 51 percent of the votes. There has never been a conservative majority in the USA. Conservatives have to win the support of a majority of moderates in order to win presidential elections. That is, a winning presidential candidate has to get the RINO vote and some DINO votes as well. Goldwater only tried to get Conservative votes. That can not elect anyone president. The MSM and the Democrats cast Goldwater as an extremist. His response was to confirm he was an extremeist in his acceptance speech. Goldwater said in his presidential acceptance speech. and I quote, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue"
The Democratic accusation was that Goldwater would start a nuclear World War III with the Soviet Union. "Extremism" was the Democrats and media code word for provoking the Soviets into a nuclear war with us. And Goldwater in effect made many voters fear he would do just that. That is not a mistake. That is gross stupidity and an act revealing total ignorance about how badly needed voters would react to such a statement.
[snip]
Goldwater was not a very bright man. He had a poltical tin ear. He had worst political instints of any candidate in my lifetime. And Goldwater went with his instincts. He was, as a candidate, a prescription for conservative disaster.
Goldwater made it very difficult to sell conservative ideas to moderate voters. Reagan had to sell his tax cuts as a JFK policy he was going to follow. Reagan sold his foreign policy as a continuation of the JFK foreign policy of "support any friend .. oppose any foe." etc. Reagan dared not even say Goldwaters name in the 1980 campaign and he did not.
In the 1980 campaign, we in the media never once got Reagan to say Goldwater's name. There was no way Ronnie was going to give us a sound bite with Goldwater's name in it. In 1980 Reagan would answer a question about Goldwater as "The Senator from Arizona." Which Senator from Arizona, he was referring to, was left for us to figure out.
I once interviewed LBJ... after he was out of office. Among the questions I asked him was to what did he attribute his ability to get his Great Society agenda passed, FDR had been unable to get those programs passed. (FDR had in fact proposed all the ideas and programs in LBJ's Great Society.)
LBJ winked and said, "FDR did not have Barry Goldwater to help him get it passed!" By that LBJ meant that Barry Goldwater's defeat gave LBJ a filibuster proof Senate and a rock solid House that would do his will. With that kind of congress the great Society was easy to pass. - Common Tator
Romney is a faux candidate. He simply doesn't have the backing of the party base. Without it you can't win an election.
NOTE: most folks who’ve bothered taking a look at them come to the conclusion the Unitarian-Universalists are not Christians either.
Only an immature know-nothing like you would compare POTUS-voting to a game of marbles.
You WILL be held accountable before God for your association in the sins of others (1 Tim. 5:22; Rev. 18:4-5). The Revelation verses are in a socio-political context.
God will ask you why you tried to put somebody in power who advocated AFTER a "pro-life 'conversion'" that parents donate their offspring to "research."
God will ask you why you tried to put somebody in power who claims to be a "god-in-embryo" and seeks to compete with THE GOD for His glory, His worship, & reception of prayers.
That's ALL very serious stuff...NOT a game of marbles as your sorry worldview portends.
Whatever. stay home and them act blameless when we are stuck in full blown communism.
no one will satisfy you delusional nuts. I hate Romney, but I am ABO against Obama.
it’s not about myth or the GOP, its about ousting the communist traitor and demented Marxist freak in the WH.
do you not grasp this?
| YEAR | Obvious Pro-Abortion Romney | Romney Feigning 'Pro-Life' | |
| Bottom-Line Summary: ANN Romney Lies Thru Her Teeth | Ann Romney, 1994: Romney's wife gives donation to Planned Parenthood (Ann Romney’s Planned Parenthood Donation | Ann Romney, 2011: In the past you’ve said he’s changed positions only once, on abortion. Was that your doing? No, no, I never talked to Mitt about that. Our personal opinions have never changed; we’ve always been pro-life (Ann Romney Reveals Mitt's Softer Side) | |
| Bottom-Line Summary: Mitt Romney Lies Thru His Teeth | “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) + ...”my position was effectively pro-choice." (Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007) | So, not only does Ann Romney tell Parade Magazine November 2011 that they've “never changed” re: abortion and that they've “always been pro-life,” but Mitt Romney told Chris Wallace part-way through their 2007 campaign that: “I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice”...This was seven months after he said in January 2007 that he was “always for life.” | |
| Romney, goin' back to 1970 when Romney's Mom ran for Senate | "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) | "'He's been a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly,'" Romney adviser Michael Murphy told the conservative National Review..., says the Concord Monitor = So I guess that made him a below-the-radar "flip" acting like a "flop?" | |
| 1994 (Campaign) | "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice." (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) = Mitt the flipster from what most LDS represent their faith as being...BTW, Romney uses the strongest word possible for support – “sustain” ...Note for non-Mormons: Lds use the word “sustain” for support for their own “prophet” | Romney has since invoked a "nuanced stance" about what he was in 1994: He says "Look, I was pro-choice. I am pro-life. You can go back to YouTube and look at what I said in 1994. I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice. (Source: Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate Aug 5, 2007) | |
| 1994 (Planned Parenthood ties) → 2001 | (a) Romney's wife gives donation to Planned Parenthood (a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/09/ann-romneys-planned-parenthood-donation/">Ann Romney’s Planned Parenthood Donation (b) On June 12, 1994, Romney himself attends private Planned Parenthood event at home of a sister-in-law of a Planned Parenthood board member where the president of Planned Parenthood recalls talking to Romney: "Nicki Nichols Gamble, a former president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said today that the photo shows Mitt and Ann Romney at a private home in Cohasset in June 1994." Source: See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941932/posts; "Gamble said the pic was snapped at an event at GOP activist Eleanor Bleakie’s house and that she “clearly” remembered speaking with Romney at the event." Source: See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941627/posts; "In fact Romney personally attended the Planned Parenthood event in question on June 12, 1994. Gamble, the President of Massachusuetts Planned Parenthood in 1994, also attended the event at the home of a Republican, Eleanor Bleakie, the sister-in-law of a Planned Parenthood Board member. Both Romney and Michael Kennedy, who appeared on behalf of nephew of Ted Kennedy, attended the event." Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941240/posts | 2001: "I do not wish to be labeled pro-choice." (Mitt Romney, Letter to the Editor, The Salt Lake Tribune, 7/12/01) = So he doesn't want to be known as a "flop" (so what is he?) | |
| 2002-2004 | “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose, and have devoted and am dedicated to honoring my word in that regard…(Nov. 2, 2002) = Well, now guess what? He's solidly pro-abortion AGAIN! See also: "I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one … Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's." (Stephanie Ebbert, "Clarity Sought On Romney's Abortion Stance," The Boston Globe, 7/3/05) = Ah, back securely in the "flop" saddle again? | Nov. '04: Romney & his wife had simultaneous pro-life "conversions" linked to stem cell research: Romney met w/Dr. Douglas Melton from Harvard Stem Cell Institute: He recalls that it happened in a single revelatory moment, during a Nov. 9, 2004, meeting with an embryonic-stem-cell researcher who said he didn't believe therapeutic cloning presented a moral issue because the embryos were destroyed at 14 days. "It hit me very hard that we had so cheapened the value of human life in a Roe v. Wade environment that it was important to stand for the dignity of human life," Romney says. Source: Time Mag, March 9, 2007 = (So the pro-abortion-but-no-pro-choice-label-please-is-now-a-pro-life-convert?) | |
| 2005 | May 27 2005: Romney affirms his commitment to being "pro-choice" at a press conference. ("I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice.") = OK, this is at least a flop from November '04! | What about his gubernatorial record '03-'06? Mitt later says his actions were ALL pro-life. I assume somewhere in '05 some 'pro-life' decisions. "As governor, I’ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I’ve taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life, I have stood on the side of life." = So, THESE ACTIONS were not only an '02 commitment reversal, but his May 27, '05 press conference commitment as well. So "flipping" is beginning to be routine | |
| 2006 | April 12, 2006--Mitt signs his "Commonwealth Care" into existence, thereby expanding abortion access/taxpayer funded abortions for women--including almost 2% of the females of his state who earn $75,000 or more. (Wait a minute, I thought he told us post-'06 that ALL of his actions were "pro-life?"). Also, not only this, but as governor, Romney could exercise veto power to portions of Commonwealth Care. Did Romney exercise this power? (Yes, he vetoed Sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 & 137). What prominent section dealing with Planned Parenthood as part of the "payment policy advisory board" did Romney choose NOT to veto? (Section 3) That section mandates that one member of MassHealth Payment Policy Board must be appointed by Planned Parenthood League of MA. (See chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, section 3 for details). | "As governor, I’ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I’ve taken as the governor that relates | |
| Early 2007 | On January 29, 2007 during South Carolina visit, Romney stated: “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) = OK how could "every action I've taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life..." AND this statement BOTH be true? | Another South Carolina campaign stop has Romney uttering "I was always for life”: "I am firmly pro-life… I was always for life." (Jim Davenport, "Romney Affirms Opposition to Abortion," The Associated Press, 2/9/2007) = Oh, of course as the above shows, he's always been pro-life! | |
| Summer 2007 | "I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice." Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007 = OK...looking at '94 & '02 campaigns, both his public statements, his 2002 voter guide responses, & his actions (which are a major form of expression, ya know!) how could he say he "never said" he was "pro-choice?" | Then comes his 8/12/07 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox: "I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice, and so..." = Whatever he was from '70 when his mom ran as pro-abortion senator & he sided w/ her, to 5/27/05, w/whatever interruption he had due to a pro-life altar call in Nov of '04, whatever that was...well, he assures us it wasn't a pro-abortion 'inlook' or outlook 'cause he didn't feel "pro-choice..." = So does that make him a life-long pro-lifer? | |
| December 2007 vs. November 2011 (Pro-treating offspring as research refuse late in previous POTUS campaign vs. now claiming 'never changed...always pro-life' | December 4, 2007: Romney: ...surplus embryos...Those embryos, I hope, could be available for adoption for people who would like to adopt embryos. But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable. It should not be made against the law." (Source: Candidates Reveal Their Biggest Mistakes)NEXT breath says if a "PARENT" wants to be "pro-choice" (Mitt used the word "decides" which is what "pro-choicers" say they want) "to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable." Say what???? How about 8-month gestationally-aged infants in the womb, Mitt? Or already-born infants, too, Mitt? If a "parent decides they would want to donate one of those...for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable..." No??? What's the 'pro-life' difference, Mitt? Here you call an embryo's mom&dad "parents" -- but "parents" w/ "research" give-away rights? How bizarre we have such a schizophrenic "candidate!" | In the past you’ve said he’s changed positions only once, on abortion. Was that your doing? No, no, I never talked to Mitt about that. Our personal opinions have never changed; we’ve always been pro-life (Ann Romney Reveals Mitt's Softer Side) |
No surprise here.
And people wonder why the country has been sliding into an abyss for decades.
The definition of insanity, is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.
I see this as one big repeating political sham.
BTW, they corrupted and undermined the electoral process, years ago, by people like Bush dumping tens of millions of illegals and tens of hundreds of thousands of Muslims into the U.S., just as his buddy Obama continues to do.
One not need a telescope to see this.
NOTE: most folks who’ve bothered taking a look at them come to the conclusion the Unitarian-Universalists are not Christians either.
I’m not familiar with the Unitarian-Universalists, but thanks for the information.
It is a sham and I freely admit that, but no matter what, Obama needs to go!
Since they're all riding in the same fully stocked government limo, few of them will notice.
>>And if that’s your strategy, as a Conservative I ask you to stop using that adjective to describe yourself. NO true Conservative takes his or her marbles home to clear a path for an Obama second term.
No true conservative would vote for a pro-gun-ban, pro-socialist-medicine, anti-free-market LIBERAL and still claim to be a conservative. The last time the GOP ran a conservative for president was 1984. Since 1988, we have seen nothing but a long train of wishy-washy moderates that bravely tucked tail and ran every time the Rats arrayed for battle and every time the GOP/e has claimed we just had to hold our noses and vote for them. No more! If America is to burn, then let’s get it over with. Bring on the Apocalypse!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.