Posted on 11/21/2006 10:10:33 AM PST by colorcountry
Yes, quite. He made a statement after the legislation was passed in Massachusetts, saying what a great system it was and that he thought that a similar federal program was a great idea, and would be a great basis for a presidential campaign.
Unless the article was from the Onion, the guy is a loser before he even gets started.
Thank you for your intellectual honesty.
I am sure Mitt is a great guy and would even make a great president, but we do not need to nominate a guy that will have to spend all of his time explaining and defending his religion and trying to garner votes, instead of talking about the issues and hammering away on Hitlery.
I guess most evangelicals (including myself, at this point) support Rudy . Go figure.
If someone does not arise and quick, we will just continue to slouch on toward the end of all democrat processes in this republic. Next stop Tyrant City.
More crap from the Anti-LDS SL Baboon!
Sort of like Medicaid, but privately run. I read that it is so expensive in Massachusetts, already, that they don't know how they are going to fund it.
The trouble is, my observation of the "purists" over the past 8 years indicates that no one will satisfy them. We need to figure out a way to win without the purists.
Another way is to not nominate someone who is unpalatable to your base....go out and find someone who is!
Are you trying to tell me there is no one out there that doesn't already have a 43% stike against them and that isn't a RINO? If so then you could possibly run with him and win.
I don't know, with a nice bernaise sauce they are quite tasty.
Say what you will about the subsidy component, but this is not "socialized medicine."
"When it comes to Governor Romney, we are looking at a person with a rather considerable track record regarding the role of his faith in his public life. Is he a faithful member of his church? Yes. What has that meant for his career? Well, he is a man of integrity with an unbelievable work ethic and strong convictions in favor of religious freedom, a culture of life, traditional values, and courage in the face of tyranny.
He has applied those values to build companies, save the Olympics, and defend our culture at the same time that he has governed one of the most liberal states in the nation innovatively and effectively. Let's judge this man, this applicant for perhaps the world's most important job, by his individual merits. Identity group politics and theological blacklisting is a leftist specialty--it should not be a Christian practice."
David French at www.evangelicalsformitt.com
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Good luck coming up with, and executing that plan in the next 2 years....
BTW, my personal beliefs align with the "purists", and even though I let my beliefs guide me in my decision on who to vote for, I understand politics enough not to waste my vote. IOW, I never vote for a 3rd party candidate, or try to nominate someone who cannot stand up to the RATS in the general election.
All that being said, Mitt is DOA with the Christian right and we need to move on. (IMHO)
Just keep wishing. The majority of the country is not like you, call them sheeple, but they are much more tolerant than you and I think they will vote for him cause they won't like people like you attacking him for NOTHING ..... kind of an under dog thing.
Whatever, all knowing one...I know a lot more about mormonism than you do....and it frightens me to death that we would actually be thinking of nominating him. That is precisely why I am against his nomination. The skeletons will be exposed and his chances of being elected will actually diminish once the discussion about his beliefs begin.
Move on to whom? Sam Brownback? Hey, I'm already on record leaning toward Rudy -- admittedly no saint. It is increasingly clear that there will be no viable "evangelical" candidate in the primaries in '08. We're going to have to get behind someone in 2008, and I can pretty much guarantee that person won't be ideal.
What's so bad about Mormons?
So, how are they going to fund it?
His church is a Ponzi scheme, not just another Christian denomination (because LDS is NOT Christian, despite what they themselves claim).
His church has a President/Prophet who receives direct ongoing revelation from their god (not the Christian God). He, and the Council of the Twelve.
Because the basic tenets of Mormonism deny the basic tenets of Christianity (its actually reminiscent of old Gnosticism), I cannot support it. A Mormon President will pack government with Mormon cronies at all levels.
Mormonism craves legitimacy. It craves recognition as Christian (which it is not).
SUMMARY: I can vote DEMOCRAT before I can vote MORMON.
For me, religious affiliation is paramount over mere political party affiliation.
Sauron
Nothing is wrong with Mormons, my family are all members and I love them. They do not however recognize the cognitive dissonance of their beliefs....they are totally indoctrinated and will do almost anything to defend the position of their church. They will distort the truth, hide its history, downplay the importance of the covenants they take (when in the company of unbelievers.)
They in actuality are Lying for the Lord. It is a common practice among practioners of Mormonism. They will not answer a straightforward question, but will skirt the issue and "not answer the question you asked, but answer the question you SHOULD have asked."
On second thought, Romney is a perfect politician because of his religion.
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.