Posted on 02/15/2007 12:31:20 PM PST by sevenbak
Mitt Romney Accepts Pat Robertson Speech Invite
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney will speak at the commencement at Regent University, the school founded by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson.
Romney will address the graduates on May 5.
Robertson has not endorsed Romney, and Regent University does not endorse political candidates, Regent spokeswoman Sherri Stocks said.
"At Regent, we often invite a variety of leaders to speak to our campus," Stocks said.
Founded in 1978, Regent has some 5,000 students studying on campuses in Virginia Beach and Washington, D.C., and also via online distance education.
Last year, Sen. John McCain, another Republican hopeful, spoke at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University.
© 2007 Associated Press.
Another fake conservative. How many times can we be fooled? I'm sick of choosing the best of the worst. I won't vote for anyone not named Paul, Tancredo, or Brownback. I was behind Newt, but he's swayed heavily towards the neocon side. I for one am sick of psuedo-communists/Trotskyists posing as conservatives, and we swallowing it because they happen to be running as Republicans. It's got to become about the ideology again, not the party.
You don't vote FOR anyone. Pretty much ever.
You vote AGAINST people, because that is the only way to deny them power.
Why did Pat invite a Mormon to speak at his school?????
Brownback
**
After he took a swipe at the President's Iraq plans? No, thanks.
How about Duncan Hunter?
Maybe God told Roberson that he wants Pretty Boy Flip Flop Romney to be president.
Good for Mitt, the more exposure, the better,, I'm technically too far right as usual but I like to see what options will be on the table in the upcoming debates and primaries which are sadly way too far off, imo.
Okay, thanks for your opinion, but does your post have anything to do with the article heading the thread, or have you just used this opportunity to tell us how you feel really feel about Romney?
I get a kick out of all the hub bub here and hub bub there.
The tools we take for granted today are so different from years ago, when it comes to the press and the internet, the visual medium has become an artform ,, people are portrayed favorably or torn down so easily and readily.
We need an opportunity for All the candidates to speak and respond to all the faces and voices of America, wherever they may be gathered.
I love a good horse race and seeing them brought home down the stretch, they haven't even entered the starting gates at most, and they ain't all in yet , soooo..
Until then ,, We'll have to watch the bullriding and bronco busting events I reckun,, and the clowns. I love the clowns.. ;-)
The utter foolishness expressed here by some posters is breathtaking.
Defeating Hillary and every other possible democrat are my only aims.
I have been saying all along, that I want a full field of GOP candidates and thus far, we have a pretty good field, if not a full field.
If it can help to elevate the debate of the issues at hand, that is,, and not get caught up in all this personal destruction that even good folks get caught up in.. Got Mud? .. to sling.Who doesn't?
If not, I'll sell ya some. ;-) ;-) lol
Good News! : )
Sell me some mud? Why Norm, you burgeoning capitalist you! I thought mud was FRee here.
They don't or maybe you haven't noticed Speaker Piglosi and Majority Leader Reid.
Check out the website called "Mitt TV".
The clip called "I believe" is pretty incredible. Some might say even Reaganesque.
Mitt ping :0)
ahhhh, OK , How about some bricks instead?
They are flame-hardened, fresh daily. :-)
YES! Bricks! What better way to ward off the straw men!!
Yeah, right, your objection to Romney is about some incomplete quote you saw on a thread. Romney in his Presidential Announcement speech Tuesday spoke in more detail, and he doesn't waver on Iraq at all. I assume this won't satisfy you, because your objection to Romney likely preceded the "swipe" he supposedly took, and you dislike Romney for other reasons.
Across the nation, there is debate about our future course in Iraq. Our desire to bring our troops home, safely and soon, is met with our recognition that if Iraq descends into all-out civil war, millions could die; that Iraq's Sunni region could become a base for Al Qaeda; that its Shia region could be seized by Iran; that Kurd tension could destabilize Turkey; and even that the broader Middle East could be drawn into conflict. The possible implications for America and for American interests from such developments could be devastating. It could mean a future with far more military involvement and far more loss of American life. For these reasons, I believe that so long as there is a reasonable prospect of success, our wisest course is to seek stability in Iraq, with additional troops endeavoring to secure the civilian population.
Any excuse suffices.
I think Bigg Red was talking about Brownback not Romney.
Hmmmm...I guess your right. I should take up the Pretty Boy crack, but it is too lame to really bother with.
I will be voting for the candidate I think will make the best CIC, but I doubt my vote will matter when my state's primary is held in March of '08.
In the general election, I will vote for the GOP nominee. Defeating Hillary and every other democrat possible, is my sole aim and goal.
Why would you support Brownback who is for amnesty for illegal immigrants? I second the question of why not support Duncan Hunter's run?
Wow. That seems to mirror my tagline, which so many FReepers seem to ignore.
I'm looking forward to hearing more from Romney.
At the moment, this forum is practically unreadable because of the flame wars and spam posts that seem to accompany a post about any particular candidate.
FR is at its best when engaged in rational discussion. That is getting harder to find.
You've said a mouthful. I am grateful for the Anna Nicole thread. :0)
ROTFLOL
I agree we have a pretty good field in terms of experience and gravitas. I wish there was a true conservative in the bunch who doesn't have personal baggage.
The Democrats have Hillary, Obama, and Edwards who reminds me of the drum major at my high school. They also have Dennis the Menace, Bidden the plaigerer, and Dodd who I've read likes to accompany Ted Kennedy to bars. Richards always reminds me of a slob teacher I had in high school. He needs a major wardrobe makeover.
Did we attend the same high school? ROTFLOL!
I don't know enough about Pat Robertson's politics to say if he's fake or not.
I guess he is showing forth kindness towards a fellow believer in Christ.
I meant Bill Richardson, not Richards, of course. Ann Richards is dead.
You're right about the tone of the discussion about candidates. I was practically murdered for suggesting that reporters may have some dirt on Guiliani that they're planning to reveal.
you're officially screwed.
are you implying Guiliani or Romney or others aren't Republicans? is President Bush considered a Democrat since he's pro-amnesty and spending is out of control?
the slight-of-hand here is taking GOP candidates who are 80-95% conservative and then saying that 5-20% delegates them to Democrat status. President Bush is, at best, 80-90% conservative. does that make him a Democrat?
I thought Romney's speech was very good. And he lingered for a long time afterward signing autographs and greeting everyone including some old friends who had traveled a long way. He seems like a pleasant, genuinely friendly guy. His charm against Hillary's shrewish nastiness would be an interesting contrast.
By the way, I read recently that his reading has included "America Alone" and "The Looming Tower." Good selection.
The participants on both sides of the arguments regarding any particular candidate have engaged in this.
You can argue about who is responding and who started it all day, but it's out there. And it's not helpful. If the GOP doesn't tear itself up over the election nearly two years from now, this forum surely shows signs of potential trouble.
I'm more of a wait and see guy. Nobody needs my money until late summer at the earliest, and my vote no earlier than February or March of next year.
I knew exactly who you meant.
Ugh. Romney could do better than this guy. Mitt may be smart to run to Rudy and McCain's right, but "Real conservatives" like Patty helped cost the GOP the midterms.
I couldn't have said it any better. I was quite charitable in calling Bush 80-90% conservative. I guess it all depends on how 'paleo' one's conservative paradigm is.
I guess the next logical question would be 'is America interested in electing a real paleo-conservative?' Americans have given me no reason or evidence to suspect they are.
I think Romney could be more convincing running as a fiscal conservative. He seems to run a tight ship whether it was as governor or with the 2002 Winter Olympics. My advice would be to stay away from the nannystating crowd and concentrate on the basics, like in a recent speech he gave on spending.
...took a swipe at the President's Iraq plans..
**
I was referring to Brownback, not Romney.
&&
...you dislike Romney for other reasons....
**
I don't dislike Romney. I just don't trust him because he has flipped on 2 key issues: abortion and special rights for homosexuals.
Guiliani is also in my negative column on those issues, if that is any consolation for you.
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.