Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MassResistance (anti-Romney group) Vs. The Truth
MassResistance.org ^ | 07/13/07 | Reaganesque

Posted on 07/13/2007 9:25:11 PM PDT by Reaganesque

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last
So, in the same speech where Gov. Romney spent the overwhelming majority of his time expressing support for an amendment to the MA state constitution to prohibit gay marriage and opposition to activist judges, MassResistance tries to imply that Gov. Romney whole-heartedly actually endorses what he just got done condemning. I ask the average reader, is this a reasonable conclusion?

But don't take my word for it. Go to their website and see for yourself. It is said you can tell a lot about a man from the enemies he has. MassResistance, with their highly stilted and utterly irrational opposition to the former governor, is saying very good things about Mitt Romney.

1 posted on 07/13/2007 9:25:13 PM PDT by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Austin1; bcbuster; beaversmom; bethtopaz; BlueAngel; Bluestateredman; borntoraisehogs; brivette; ...
Mitt Ping!

• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List


2 posted on 07/13/2007 9:26:56 PM PDT by Reaganesque (Romney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
I don't think Romney is a leftist. I just don't think he's much of a conservative. That's not a crime, and I don't hate or even dislike ROmney.

I happen to like George W. Bush, but Romney is more of the same wishy-washy "conservatism" which in the end is no such thing.

One doesn't have to hate Romney or think he's a leftist to think he isn't a very good choice for president.

3 posted on 07/13/2007 9:30:12 PM PDT by Darkwolf377 (Bostonian, atheist, prolifer, free-speech zealot, pro-legal immigration anti-socialist dude.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
In the last year, every New York Times and Boston Globe columnist has flipped in their articles -- from saying what a rightwing fascist Mitt Romney was as governor, to what a liberal he is and shouldn't be nominated.

They really don't want him up against Hillary.

4 posted on 07/13/2007 9:31:09 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
Below is a portion of the site you linked. Please tell us what "MassResistance" has wrong, if you will:

Homosexual "Rights"

Gov. Romney has a long history of promoting and furthering the homosexual agenda, and working closely with leading gay activists

Romney twice sought and received the endorsement of the homosexual Log Cabin Republican Club

Romney's campaign distributed pro-gay rights campaign literature during Boston's "Gay Pride" events

Romney supports homosexual "anti-discrimination" laws

Such laws are usually carried out at the expense of freedom of religion and speech. For example, they would allow lawsuits against a Christian book store owner for refusing to hire a homosexual activist applicant.

Romney advocates homosexual couples' adoption rights be recognized by the government

Romney supports homosexual domestic partnerships

Romney supported and promoted legalizing homosexual civil unions

Romney Opposes the Boy Scouts' Ban on Homosexual Scoutmasters

Romney barred Boy Scouts from public participation in 2002 Olympics

Homosexual activism in government

Romney appointed prominent homosexuals to key positions in his administration

Romney appointed prominent homosexual activists and Democrats as judges

Romney Rewards one of the State's Leading Anti-Marriage Attorneys by Making him a Judge

Romney announces he won't fill judicial vacancies before term ends

Romney's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth used huge taxpayer funding to promote homosexuality in the public schools

Romney's Commission organized public gay "Youth Pride Day" parades and "transgender proms" which promote unhealthy and risky behavior

Romney issues a proclamation celebrating gay "Youth Pride Day"

Romney's Department of Education promotes the homosexual agenda

Romney's Department of Public Health (DPH) cooperates with the homosexual activist movement

Romney opposed federal legislation that would stop public schools from promoting homosexuality

Romney's Dept. of Social Services honors homosexual "married" couple as adoptive "Parents of the Year"

Homosexual "Marriage"

Romney refused to endorse the original 2002 Mass. constitutional amendment absolutely defining marriage as one man and one women

Romney unnecessarily (and unconstitutionally) implemented homosexual marriages in Massachusetts

Romney had marriage licenses changed to allow same-sex marriages

Romney administration ordered Justices of Peace to perform homosexual "marriages" when asked - or be fired!

Romney administration's training of Town Clerks (on how to issue same-sex marriage licenses) states that marriage statutes were not changed

Romney signs bill eliminating Sexual Transmitted Disease (STD) testing requirement for marriage

When requested of him, Romney personally issues special one-day certificates to allow otherwise unqualified people to perform homosexual "marriages"

Was Romney's public opposition to homosexual "marriage" based on expediency, not principle?

The Mitt Romney Deception
5 posted on 07/13/2007 9:37:54 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque

Mitt bump!


6 posted on 07/13/2007 9:38:13 PM PDT by TheLion (How about "Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement," for a change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

No. But MassResistance clearly hates him and anyone who doesn’t deny that gays are human beings, that is my point. They don’t comprehend the concept that you don’t have to hate gays to oppose their agenda.


7 posted on 07/13/2007 9:38:42 PM PDT by Reaganesque (Romney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

EV, does a politician have to hate homosexuals in order to be a true conservative?


8 posted on 07/13/2007 9:40:31 PM PDT by Reaganesque (Romney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
"MassResistance" has the video below on the website you linked. Did Brian Camenker force Mitt Romney to try and run to the left of Teddy Kennedy?

Romney/Kennedy Debate

9 posted on 07/13/2007 9:42:33 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
In almost every speech he gives on the topic, he simply focuses on "every child needing a father and a mother."

Then perhaps you missed this from above:

My view is that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman. I also maintain that something so fundamental to our society as marriage should be decided by the citizens, and not by a court with a one-justice majority. My preference is that when the issue is decided by the citizens, that it's a very clean, straightforward, unambiguous amendment which they have the opportunity to vote on, rather than something which is confused by multiple features being combined. And I'm concerned that the amendment currently under consideration in the legislature is somewhat confused or muddied by the combination of two things. One is the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, which I support. The other is the requirement that there be civil unions in the Commonwealth, which is a condition I do not support.

It wasn't highlighted so, it was easy to miss since it was right next to a highlighted section.

10 posted on 07/13/2007 9:45:26 PM PDT by Reaganesque (Romney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
EV, does a politician have to hate homosexuals in order to be a true conservative?

No. But they sure don't need to put them on the bench and in his administration like Romney did, or give them free rein to infect the schools with their extreme propaganda, or name two gay men "Parents of the Year," or force the justices of the peace to "marry" them, etc., etc., etc.

11 posted on 07/13/2007 9:46:11 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque

Don’t you think a candidate’s current rhetoric should bear at least some passing resemblance to their actual record?


12 posted on 07/13/2007 9:47:09 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Funny, if one reads MassResistance's website and your posts, you would certainly get the impression that regarding gays as human beings disqualifies a politician from being conservative.

Please explain how the following is of such interest to you and MassResistance:

I think it's important that in any discussion related to marriage that we should reiterate time and again our view that individuals in our society should be able to make the choices they want in their lives, and that we have respect for people's choices. We have a high degree of respect and tolerance for people whose lifestyle and choices and orientation is as they may choose.

How does that make him pro-radical gay agenda?

13 posted on 07/13/2007 9:51:44 PM PDT by Reaganesque (Romney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
Mitt Romney, from your quote:

"The other is the requirement that there be civil unions in the Commonwealth, which is a condition I do not support."

Romney's actual record:

Within days of the Goodridge ruling, Romney announced that he supported homosexual civil unions: Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said yesterday he was ready to work with lawmakers to craft a "civil union"-style law to give some marriage rights to homosexual couples, even though he also supports a constitutional amendment to preserve traditional marriage . . . Mr. Romney yesterday told TV news stations that he would support a Vermont-style civil union law in Massachusetts, but reiterated his support for a constitutional amendment that would clarify that "marriage is an institution between a man and a woman." - Washington Times, 11/20/2003

In 2005, Romney tried to tell South Carolina Republicans that he had always opposed civil unions: Massachusetts Governor Romney is coming under fire for comments he made about gay marriage to Republican activists in South Carolina. Romney told Monday night's gathering in Spartanburg County that he's always been opposed to same-sex marriage as well as what he called "it's equivalent, civil unions." Romney, however, has for months backed a proposed amendment to the Massachusetts constitution that would ban gay marriage but provide for civil unions with the same rights and responsibilities as marriage. Massachusetts State Representative Phil Travis says Romney can't be for civil unions when he's in Massachusetts and against them when he's out-of-state. Travis has been a leading opponent of same-sex unions. - Associated Press, 2/23/2005

Romney strong-armed conservative Republicans into supporting a constitutional amendment that included civil unions: Through all the twists and shifts during the gay-marriage debate this year, there was one constant: 22 Republicans in the House of Representatives opposed every measure that would grant gay couples civil unions in the constitution. That all changed yesterday, however, when 15 of that 22-member bloc broke away at the urging of Governor Mitt Romney and voted in favor of a proposed amendment that would ban gay marriage but create Vermont-style civil unions. Those 15 members provided the margin of victory, observers from both camps said yesterday after the measure passed by just five votes. In the end, the 15 agreed that approving a measure that they viewed as highly undesirable was preferable to the possibility that nothing would be sent to the state ballot for voters to weigh in on. - Boston Globe 3/30/2004 (Note: This amendment, which included mandated provisions for civil unions, was ultimately defeated in the Legislature and never did go to the voters.)

14 posted on 07/13/2007 9:53:54 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

His rhetoric does match up if you consider the comments that you and MassResistance chose to ignore in the above press conference. When considering a man’s record, you have to consider all of it and not just the parts you cherry pick in support of an agenda.


15 posted on 07/13/2007 9:55:00 PM PDT by Reaganesque (Romney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
How does that make him pro-radical gay agenda?

His record is what makes him "pro-radical gay agenda."

16 posted on 07/13/2007 9:55:12 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

EV, most rational people aren’t buying your BS. The more and more you post this drivel, the more you reveal yourself and your sources as far-out kooks. I appreciate your comments in that they are self-revealing. I firmly believe that if you let extremists talk, they always drive people away from their cause and not towards it and you have done a superb job in driving people away from your supposed cause.


17 posted on 07/13/2007 9:58:32 PM PDT by Reaganesque (Romney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
No person of any intellect or moral character believes what comes out of Mass Resistance.

People with a fourth grade education can read the truth and see that is not what they are selling.

Brian Camenker has a homosexual demon in his head he battles constantly. Ask any psychiatrists why people show irrational hate to this degree.
18 posted on 07/13/2007 10:02:05 PM PDT by elizabetty (Perpetual Candidate using campaign donations for your salary - Its a good gig if you can get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
individuals in our society should be able to make the choices they want in their lives, and that we have respect for people's choices.

It is right to respect a persons RIGHT to make choices but I see no reason anyone has to respect peoples choices. A lot of peoples choices are to do wrong and harmful things and they deserve no respect. Romney's words show he believes that there are no moral absolutes and that all choices people make deserve respect. This is the same position as secular humanists who can easily accept the radical gay agenda, or any other agenda.

19 posted on 07/13/2007 10:03:10 PM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
There will be children born to same-sex couples, and adopted by same-sex couples, and I believe that there should be rights and privileges associated with those unions and with the children that are part of those unions.

I gotta disagree with this!

20 posted on 07/13/2007 10:27:37 PM PDT by TheDon (The DemocRAT party is the party of TREASON! Overthrow the terrorist's congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson