Posted on 08/06/2012 6:04:51 PM PDT by xzins
Well, this doesn’t make much sense, now does it??
Back in June, we showed you a video of Mitt Romney from 1994, proclaiming his support of the Boy Scouts of America and his views on its gay members.
CLICK HERE to see the video if you missed it.
In the video, Romney stated:
“I believe that the Boy Scouts of America does a wonderful service for this country. I support the right of the Boy Scouts of America to decide what it wants to do on that issue. I feel that all people should be able to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.”
Now, a spokeswoman for Romney is saying he STILL upholds those beliefs and confirmed:
“This remains Romney’s position today.”
This is where things get confusing, though, seeing as Mitt has opposed gay marriage, but yet, he thinks ALL boys should have the right to participate in the Boy Scouts!
What gives, Mitt???
Equality for all…in every aspect!
So, would it be correct to conclude from your post that you prefer Obama wins the election over Romney in November?
So, would it be correct to conclude from your post that you prefer Obama wins the election over Romney in November?
Yes, I also posted this today
Unemployment rises, hundreds of thousands quit looking (UE rate drop since 2009 due to giving up)
found here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2915233/posts
this is my thread posting activity for about the past week:
Mitt Romney Supports Gay Boy Scouts But Not Gay Marriage?
Monday, August 06, 2012 9:04:51 PM · by xzins · 49 replies
Zimbio ^ | Aug 4
Well, this doesn’t make much sense, now does it?? Back in June, we showed you a video of Mitt Romney from 1994, proclaiming his support of the Boy Scouts of America and his views on its gay members. CLICK HERE to see the video if you missed it. In the video, Romney stated: “I believe that the Boy Scouts of America does a wonderful service for this country. I support the right of the Boy Scouts of America to decide what it wants to do on that issue. I feel that all people should be able to participate in the...
Will Romney VP Choice Unite (Only) Bush-Romney Wing of the GOP?(And ignore other 75% of base?)
Monday, August 06, 2012 3:10:45 PM · by xzins · 62 replies
Conservative HQ ^ | 8/6/12 | Richard A. Viguerie
Here’s a test to apply to the names of all potential Republican vice presidential candidates: if the Washington Republican establishment, like the GOP congressional leadership, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, defense industry lobbyists and Capitol Hill political consultants, all applaud the name, Governor Romney has picked the wrong candidate and is in danger of losing the election. It is not a done deal yet, but if you look past the front page articles on the Olympics and the latest crime news, you will find articles reporting that Governor Mitt Romney is on the verge of announcing the name of the vice...
Unemployment rises, hundreds of thousands quit looking (UE rate drop since 2009 due to giving up)
Monday, August 06, 2012 1:00:53 PM · by xzins · 15 replies
UPI: Outside View ^ | Aug. 3, 2012 | Peter Morici
The U.S. economy added 163,000 jobs in July. Although an improvement over the first quarter, the ranks of the unemployed swelled another 45,000. ...The unemployment rate rose to 8.3 percent even as 348,000 workers quit looking for work and were no longer counted in the official jobless tally. In the weakest recovery since the Great Depression, nearly the entire reduction in unemployment since October 2009 has been accomplished through a significant drop in the percentage of adults participating in the labor force — either working or looking for work. Growth slowed to 1.5 percent in the second quarter as consumers...
GOP Should Invite Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy to Address Convention
Friday, August 03, 2012 3:34:51 PM · by xzins · 38 replies
Conservative HQ | 8/1/12 | Richard A. Viguerie
Today is Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day, and who better to make the case for traditional values at the Republican National Convention than Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy, a man who lives them in his business and personal life and who has paid a heavy price for publicly saying so? Mr. Cathy learned the hard way what President Obama meant when he said that this election is a choice between two different visions for the country — and by saying publicly he supports the biblical definition of the family, Cathy put himself at odds with President Obama and his Democratic Party allies on...
Obamacare’s 184 Million Christian Slaves
Friday, August 03, 2012 3:04:38 PM · by xzins · 12 replies
Conservative HQ ^ | 8/3/12 | Richard A. Viguerie
Yesterday marked the beginning of their slavery for the 78 million Catholics, 100 million Evangelicals, 6 million Mormons, and the millions of other American believers of other faiths who oppose all or part of Obamacare on religious grounds. To those who say “slave” is a word too charged in American history to be used in this context, I say perhaps “bondsman” — the word Lincoln used in his Second Inaugural Address — will fit even better. For how else do you describe the situation of a person who has no choice and is forced to labor to the benefit of...
Do We Want To Buy Canadian Oil From The Chinese?
Thursday, August 02, 2012 5:18:19 PM · by xzins · 22 replies
IBD ^ | 07/27/2012 | IBD
Buoyed by White House inaction, China’s state-owned oil company has made a multibillion-dollar bid for a Canadian company with interests in Canada’s oil sands — North American oil for the lamps of China. ‘Do we really want to be buying our oil or Canadian oil back from the Chinese?” asked Sen. John Hoeven on Thursday as he reacted to news that China’s state-owned oil company, CNOOC Ltd., had launched a $15.1 billion takeover bid for Canada’s Nexen Inc., a company with operations in the Gulf of Mexico. Our answer would be no. But it may happen, thanks to the Obama...
Reagan handled worse U.S. economic situation much better
Thursday, August 02, 2012 11:08:05 AM · by xzins · 16 replies
UPI Outside View ^ | July 27 | PETER MORICI
America is all about private enterprise, and without leadership that believes in the primacy of the private sector, it can’t succeed. The U.S. Commerce Department reported Friday the U.S. economy grew only 1.5 percent in the second quarter, down from 2.0 percent the previous period. Consumer spending slowed under the weight of growing pessimism about the effectiveness of U.S. President Barack Obama’s economic program and a growing sense that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won’t unseat him. The president leads in polls in most swing states and the president has made clear his intention to double down on interventionist economic...
Mitt Romney Better Move to Right, Says Emboldened Tea Party
Wednesday, August 01, 2012 5:10:00 PM · by xzins · 35 replies
ABC ^ | Aug. 1, 2012 | RUSSELL GOLDMAN
The stunning Texas victory of Ted Cruz, a young Tea Party-backed Republican over an establishment candidate vying for a Senate seat, has already so emboldened the insurgent conservative movement that activists are warning Mitt Romney he had better get on board. “These guys [newly elected Tea Party candidates]” are going to force Romney to the right,” said Andrea Shell, a spokeswoman for Tea Party group Freedom Works. “That is our entire mission.” His victory is the latest in a string of Tea Party candidates to tap into anti-establishment frustration within the Republican Party and overcome the steep odds and deep...
The Judgment Seat of Christ for Believers (The Judgment of Christians)
Saturday, July 28, 2012 3:43:56 PM · by xzins · 16 replies
Grace to You ^ | 5 March 29, 2012 | John MacArthur
2 Corinthians For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. (5:10) Driving PaulÂ’s noble ambition was the knowledge that there would be a penetrating uncovering of the depths of his heart by the Lord Himself. That will take place in the future when believers must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. The strong terms must and all stress the inevitability and comprehensiveness of this event. That knowledge produced in Paul strong motivation...
The closed forums ~ and most of them are closed these days ~ don't get scored.
Serious answer, Mac:
He intentionally said:
“I feel that all people should be able to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.”
ALL PEOPLE: (young and old alike)
PARTICIPATE: (not just join)
REGARDLESS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION: Gays please apply within
see 40
Well, good, but the horse is already of out the barn on those issues some might disagree with Romney on. So unless there is a viable conservative, third party candidate about to emerge, it's probably best to hold our noses and support Romney, but also work to elect even more conservatives to the House and Senate to steer more conservative legislation to him.
And if Romney is as flexible as many believe, he might prove to be very receptive to following the lead of a conservative Congress. He could become a strong advocate for traditional marriage and the rights of the BSA once he's in the WH.
Romney also said this past May that gay couples should be able to adopt children.
That would sort of lend itself to supporting gay marriage as well, as the adopted child might need married parents.
How was this hidden? It’s been out there for a long time that Romney’s a soft conservative, although he himself said severely. Perhaps he meant socially by interpersonal behavior.
You’re adding nothing new. You’re only helping re-elect Obama. Why not put energy into electing a conservative Rep or Senator?
“I’ll be better for gay boy scouts tha Sen. Kennedy - I mean Presidnt Obama.”
- Willard “mitt” Romney
Are you fantasizing? The GOP may get a 51 seat majority in the Senate. Nothing will improve if Obama stays in power. Your position is utterly naive. Get Obama out.
You do realize that he’s not just a regular Cook County Democrat right? Are you seriously proposing that America is better off with another 4 years of this incredibly destructive presidency?
Obama is Carter cubed.
Romney says exactly what he believes a particular audience wants to hear. He’s never had any convictions.
If he beats Obama, and that’s a mighty big if, conservatives will need to hold his feet to the fire on social issues.
The man is a New England RINO. And although Bush had lived in Texas the majority of his adult life, he too was a New
England RINO. Bush appointed more sodomites to his cabinet than Bill Clinton did. Look it up.
The four men being talked about for Romney’s VP are all
Catholic. Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, and
Bob McDonnell. Of the four Christie is a RINO to the extreme. Just a fat version of Romney.
Perez Hilton is the original source for the story.
It was posted by Peach15 on Zimbio from Perezhilton.com. Check your own post link. The photo and the story are all Perez Hilton
Are you Peach15? If not take a look here:
http://perezhilton.com/2012-08-05-mitt-romney-stands-by-1994-belief-gay-boy-scouts-ban
Zimbio is simply the cut out to give the story a more neutral veneer. I’d suggest you go back and read the militaries psyops manuals. You’re falling for the simplest of tricks.
Start here: http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-05-301.pdf
“PSYOP increase the relative combat power of friendly forces and adversely affect the combat power of the adversary. PSYOP accomplish this result by targeting the identified vulnerabilities of foreign audiences through
the employment of the PSYOP development process.”
You’re vulnerable religiously and politically to this type of psyops. You should know better. Don’t fall for it.
Went over your head, eh? I was pointing out that zero will probably be running this tomorrow.
“Isn’t that kind of spinning the stuff that we despise in our enemies?”
Yeah! Get it out there!
Obama will run with it tomorrow - won’t he? Pick up the liberals and piss off the conservatives so they stay home. No brainer. Then they’ll all join hands and sing “Four More Years” with tears in their eyes. Cool.
That’ll shw them what REAL conservative politics is all about.
Thanks for the information, dear brother in Christ!
How do you know that he's not? I'm totally committed to electing anyone who will fight the Romney/Obama agenda including the top line of the ballot where I will probably vote for Goode. However, I won't vote for Tweedledee or Tweedledum.
Those of us who are horrified by the prospect of a Romney Presidency are probably working a lot harder to elect a Tea Party Congress than those who have made their peace with the idea of Romney leading the party. I'm voting in the Kansas primary tomorrow - it will be straight Tea Party / pro-life ticket - anyone who has already endorsed Romney will not get my vote.
This is not a misrepresentation of Mitt Romney, Jess, this is what he said, and what he then reconfirmed.
This is gay activism.
No, 1010, I’m not helping re-elect Romney.
If they run a person they know will divide their base, then they are trying to lose.
It is the GOP-E who wants to lose. Think about it.
I don’t know what their reasons are, but I’m convinced they want to lose.
Thus far he's never said he was. I am and I have.
the Romney/Obama agenda including the top line of the ballot where I will probably vote for Goode
Voting for Goode is your right, but if you're in a battleground state then mathematically you're simply accepting the outcome of the majority. Voting for Goode or not voting that line or voting for Obama all have the same effect - re-electing Obama.
Romney and Obama don't have the same agenda. Romney's to the right of Obama and actually likes America. He's not working for the MB or the Saudis.
Those of us who are horrified by the prospect of a Romney Presidency are probably working a lot harder to elect a Tea Party Congress than those who have made their peace with the idea of Romney leading the party.
If that motivates you all the better. But Romney isn't going to lead the party. Titular head? OK, but if FReepers do their job he'll be accountable to a Congress that is serious about moving America forward. You're always going to have compromise, but we need it in the right direction. We cannot concede a SCOTUS nominee to Obama or another 4 years of his disastrous foreign and domestic policies.
Keep in mind that we're still paying for Carter's Iran folly. The terror and horror we see today are a direct outgrowth of that regime, coupled with Saudi Wahabism. Obama's outdone Carter in that sphere five fold. Add in his destructive economic beliefs and then his basic morality and it's lights out America. At least the one we used to know. I mean Obama makes Hilary Clinton look acceptable.
I understand that to sincere, devoted Christians having a Mormon in the WH is sacriligious. That said it is better than having a Cook County Democrat. Obama is worse than either of those two scenarios.
Romney’s about as bad as any Bush. Stop wringing your hands over it. It’s unbecoming.
Do you really think the GOPe did it to us? Toward the end either Newt or Santorum could have dropped out and backed the other guy. Neither did. Why?
Because they’re either all part of the conspiracy? It’s because they’re all politicians. Newt, Santorum the whole bunch slip around issues and have to tow the line. It won’t be politicians or some modern conservative savior that rights America. It will be people just like us.
Romney is to the right of Obama, flaws and all. We all know that, at least every FReeper who draws breath does. Obama is the worst, Romney’s an improvement.
If you’re convinced they want to lose then voting for Romney is logical. You’re going to get Obama so what difference does it make. I actually don’t think that’s your issue.
The issue is having a Mormon, someone you don’t believe is Christiian or perhaps you believe he’s of the Devil, as President of the United States. Had conservatives or moreso the candidates they supported coalesced around a single standard bearer you’d not have Mitt to worry about.
That said in today’s climate you’d struggle to elect a Reagan at the national level. Reagan’s demographic has passed on already. In its place is a demographic that’s been indoctrinated. Bush I & II along with Clinton helped continue the work with bad tax/spend policies. That’s the political reality we face.
We’re better off with the most conservative Congress and a never ending pledge to keep it that way. Next get rid of Obama. Then free our children from government schools, get Constitutional Carry, continue to limit abortion, etc. It’s a long road and we don’t get there with an Obama 2nd term. It shifts the moral center away from our side.
Remember, we're voting for the least-worst candidate...not necessarily the best. In that situation, as troubling as he is, the Mittster wins hands down. Only because Obama is such a stunningly, horrible choice.
There’s no “we” about it. I’m off the plantation. Period.
Then two days later he was speaking at Liberty University.
______________________________________________
where he got to meet Mr Cathy and kissed up to the multi billionare and told him that when the campaign was out on the road they came to a screeching halt at every CFA...
that the campaign fueled up amnd ran on Spicy chicken sandwiches...
Gosh they mustnt have been near one these last 2 weeks...
I think its kind of odd that the great “culture warriors” don’t have the courage to notice that wedding chapels owned by Sheldon Adelson perform gay “marriages” every day.
America has zero chance of surviving because conservatives only fight the convenient battles.
In an interview with Neil Cavuto of Fox Business Network, Romney was asked whether he believes the gay marriage debate is a new civil rights movement, as some Democrats have framed the issue.
“I don’t see it in that light,” Romney responded. “I believe my record as a person who has supported civil rights is strong and powerful. At the same time, I believe that marriage has been defined the same way for literally thousands of years by virtually every civilization in history and that marriage is by its definition a relationship between a man and woman.”
He added that “if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship, even want to adopt a child — in my state, individuals of the same sex are able to adopt children. In my view, that’s something which people have the right to do, but to call that marriage is, in my view, a departure from the real meaning of the word.”
Romney has made similar statements in the past. In 2006, as governor of Massachusetts, Romney told the Boston Globe that same-sex couples have “a legitimate interest in being able to receive adoptive services.” In 1994, he told the Boston Herald, “I would leave it [gay adoption] up to the states. I would not oppose it or require it.”
Staff writers Dan Eggen and Philip Rucker and researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report.
Washington Post May 5, 2012
I’d rather have them learning from the boy scouts then hanging out at some gay organization that tells them “Yes, your 13 and queer “, further cementing that kids beliefs and taking advantage of them, perhaps in more ways then one.
______________________________________________
Would you want that same 13 yo “exploring” his sexual orientation at a camp out in the woods with your 7 yo son ???
Mormon has never been my issue, 1010RD. I’m a retired military chaplain. I’ve had mormon commanders, mormon troops, mormon colleagues, and provided religious support for mormons for years as part of my job. I’m simply not afraid of mormons in any way, shape, or form. I even co-authored a “spiritual dimensions of family living” program with my neighbor, a mormon. So, wrong person, wrong issue.
I guarantee you, that if my co-author were the one running, I’d be supporting him.
Because he’s a conservative.
Romney is a radical liberal. You know it, I know it, and the entire literate political world knows it.
That is the basis of my objection to Romney, and any perusal of my posts all the way back to his first presidential run shows it.
But, it’s America, and you’re free to believe what you want to believe.
However, if you don’t believe that the GOP-E wants to lose, can you believe that they want to send subtle messages to the soft-on-gay-issues moderates and liberals that Romney is their secret friend? That way they can get them on board and at the same time not enflame the ABO conservatives who are supporting them.
In that case, this post aligns with Romney’s own strategy. You should like that.
Do you have a link to that article, Nana? It is amazing that he bold-faced acknowledges “gay couples” and tries to pretend that is OK because he doesn’t use the “marry” word to describe it. He proves that by saying this “gay couple” should be allowed to adopt children.
So, you have a “couple” and their children.
That sure is interesting. I didn’t know Mr. Cathy was at the Liberty U graduation. And yet Mitt just can’t bring himself to support CFA NOW......
America has zero chance of surviving because conservatives only fight the convenient battles.
________________________________________
and the popular and flavor of the month battles...
I was an early pro-lifer way before being pro-life was cool...
To be an abortion fighter way back in those days 1970s early 80s we had to go help the Catholics who were fighting the battle alone...
I got lots of grief in those days from “conservatives” who called abortion a “Catholic issue” and refused to get involved...
some so called “conservatives” told me I was an “enemy of God” and was interferring with what God wanted to do...
They claimed that nobody wanted the unborn babies but God wanted them and I was stopping them from going to God...
Only when some religious leaders decided it might be a good and profitable thing to do did the Protestant churches get involved..
but they had their fingers in the air checking the wind for several years before they decided the time was right and was convenient and timidly put their toes in...
The Catholic Church in America has from the start been the pioneers in the pro-life movement...
Thank God for the Catholics...
Romney: Gay couples should have right to adopt
Washington Post May 5, 2012
Someone had posted that info in another thread..
It might have been part of an article about Willard speaking at Liberty..
The way Willard spoke to Mr Cathy was so pandering so kissy..
No that would be an incorrect conclusion.
Now, how bout mine?
“This is not a misrepresentation of Mitt Romney, Jess, this is what he said, and what he then reconfirmed. This is gay activism.”
Yep. Heard it before. Where did I say it wasn’t him?
Are you suggesting we hide it, that we cover for the guy?
“Are you suggesting we hide it, that we cover for the guy?”
Huh? WTF is wrong with you? I said what I said. How simple is that? I’m not suggesting anything. I’m saying what I’m saying.
Picking Mitt is wrong.
go back and read your own posts
“go back and read your own posts”
Yeah...why would I do that. I wrote them. I know what’s in them. Now what’s your problem? You want to fight about something, then say what’s on your alleged mind.
The above means you object to the thread. I suppose that means you want to hide this from ABOs.
Why are you dissembling/obfuscating?
“I AM BARACK OBAMA AND I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE.”
The above, my dear dimwit, is undoubtedly true, wouldn’t you say? How else could it be taken. What isn’t true?
You noble types don’t like seeing the direct results of your high , minded thinking much, do you?
I neither object to the thread, to you, who I don’t know, or to your pedestrian mewlings about how we should comport ourselves. You have a right to your opinions and a right to post them. The Obama camp has a right to use them and rejoice. Everyone is happy.
Why, do you think the Obama camp doesn’t rejoice in this type of post? Do you think he will not approve of it?
I have been too for a long time. I first because aware of conservative politics in the Goldwater days when my father was a volunteer. Currently, I'm involved with the Kansas Senate races where we are trying to pry control away from Mitt-like RINOs and get real Republicans in there. I've been around conservatives long enough to spot a phony conservative and Mitt qualifies. He's Rudy Guiliani without Rudy's honesty to tell you what he really believes.
Voting for Goode is your right
I might vote for FR's own Eternal Vigilance. I haven't made up my mind yet except that it won't be Romney or Obama UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
Romney and Obama don't have the same agenda.
By philosophy, both have proven to be big-government advocates. They only differ in the details. Regardless of who wins, this nation will be more socialistic in four years than it is now. If there is such a great difference in their agendas, why don't you Romney apologists make a positive argument for his election rather than framing all the arguments as he's better than Obama?
Romney's to the right of Obama
You mean like 95% of the country? If Mitt Romney were a Democrat, he wouldn't even qualify as a conservative Democrat on a national scale.
If that motivates you all the better. But Romney isn't going to lead the party. Titular head? OK, but if FReepers do their job he'll be accountable to a Congress that is serious about moving America forward.
It is this nation's only hope but I'm not so foolish as to believe that it will really work with Romney. Romney isn't running to be a mere figurehead. If the Tea Partiers prove to be an obstacle to Romney's agenda, he'll just form a more-natural coalition with the RINOs and Democrats to push through his left-of-center agenda. A Tea Party Congress will be far, far more effective on Obama since it is less likely that the RINOs will support the lame-duck of the other party but will either willing or be coerced into falling in line behind the President of their own party.
I understand that to sincere, devoted Christians having a Mormon in the WH is sacriligious.
Mitt's politics make this totally irrelevant to my decision. Even if Mitt were use the acceptance speech to sincerely renounce Mormonism and embrace faith in the real Jesus Christ and not the figment of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's imagination and Mitt were to move my hometown and become a member of my church's congregation, I still wouldn't vote for him. There have only been two major Republican players whom I wouldn't vote for under any circumstance: Nelson Rockefeller (assuming I could vote at 8) and Mitt Romney.
If you are truly a conservative, think about the best possible outcome for this election (besides punting Mitt at the convention and putting a real conservative at the top of the ticket). The ideal outcome for conservatism would be Tea Party candidates winning in landslides and Mitt squeaking through by the skin of his teeth. That should make it clear to Mitt and his people that he was nothing more than the lesser of two evils and it was the agenda of the Tea Party that America wants. Rather than trying to scare or shame us Romney skeptics into violating our principles to vote for the most liberal candidate the Republican Party has even run, realize that we play right into the best case scenario for conservatism. If Romney doesn't think he'll need the Tea Party, he will ignore it without question and push the progressive agenda further than Obama could with strong Republican opposition.
Sophistry should be outlawed before 5, jess.
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.