Skip to comments.A (Virgil)'Goode' plan to save American jobs
Posted on 05/22/2012 7:05:50 AM PDT by xzins
click here to read article
As one who has joined in the debate with evolutionists to some degree...much more in the past...I absolutely agree that you have been a stalwart in that debate with Alamo-girl. I have even had the honor of early copies of some of your and AG’s writings, and I’ve been tremendously blessed by them.
So, as always, this is not about religious faith. We share that same faith.
I speak about political positions taken by Romney now and in the past.
I don’t need to stretch to claim that Romney is a radical liberal.
Just one month ago, Mitt Romney spoke in support of gay adoption by gay couples.
So, I’m not desperately reaching for material. I get it, and it get it recently, from the liberal Romney himself.
Special pleading for this man is what is reminiscent of evolutionists doing a tap dance for their favorite theory. Only this time it’s ABOs for their favorite candidate.
Of all things ....GAY COUPLES!
I hate to say it but your presuppositions about our presuppositions are neither rational nor logical.
Romney is not evil per se. Nor is he out to Destroy the American Republic. He has proven himself to be if not a "congenital liar" certainly he is a serial liar. He is not out to destroy the capitalist system, however his version of capitalism is more of a socialist corporatism that has basically become the standard working model of today's American capitalism; a synergism of socialism and capitalism working together for the good of the political establishment.
As for the allegation that we think that Romney is trying to "integrate the United States into a new globalist political order run by some nefarious internationalist cabal," there is no secret that this has been the goal of the globalists for the last several decades and those globalists include not only Democrats like Obama, but also Republicans like the two last Bush Presidents. FWIW there are very few, if any, wholly American corporations that trade on the NYSE. Most of the companies traded on the stock exchanges have no loyalty to the United States whatsoever and with their political influences through donations and perks to political officials, there is nothing American about the capitalist system we now have in place. Prior to WWII most American corporations were loyal to the United States and to United States interests. They joined together with all Americans to defeat our common enemies. These days most American Corporations join with the Chinese and Arabs and other big investors and view patriotic Americans as more or less their common enemy.
But none of your reasons is why I cannot vote for Romney.
I made a pact long ago never to support any candidate who was "pro-abortion."
Romney has a proven record as a pro-abortion politician and governor. He has no track record whatsoever of being pro-life. He and his wife have sent their hard earned money to Planned Parenthood and Romney signed into law a taxpayer funded abortion provision into his socialist health care law.
If he were a proven conservative on all other issues, that one is the killer for me. I won't vote FOR him. I will vote for the pro-life candidate. Romney has no legitimate track record as a public servant who voted conservative or who supported pro-life candidates, judges or legislation.
Betty if you can vote for him because you "hope" he will be a conservative, then you can go ahead and vote for him. But Romney is not now nor has he ever been a conservative. He is a knee jerk liberal and when push comes to shove, his knees will jerk.
That just totally flabbergasts me, CC. How can the ABOs not acknowledge what the man said just one month ago!!
We've got video, we've got transcript, and we've got commentary.
Indeed, that's an excellent description of my sense of what it's like to live in Massachusetts as a "long-time conservative 'behind enemy lines.'"
I work for a wonderful non-profit organization here that does wonderful work. Yet in the employee parking lot, every other car (it seems) is a Prius, sporting Obama/Biden and Elizabeth Warren bumper stickers. It devoted the Spring issue of its flagship magazine to a tribute to Rachel Carson. Everybody I talk to is a devotee of anthropogenic global warming. (I very gingerly like to try to point out to these folks that the science in support of AGW simply doesn't exist; that the geologic record shows natural transitions in global warming and cooling cycles throughout the Earth's history; that long-cycle solar activity very likely has impacts on the Earth's weather; that CO2 is essential to flourishing plant life, etc. Again, I say I do this "gingerly....)
At that point, usually folks go quiet on me, and I let the matter pass.... You can only do what you can when you're dealing with politically-correct, progressivist ideologues which is the common mindset in this state, both in the political class and in much of the "educated" populace.
Thank you so very much, dear Agamemnon, for your series of outstanding essay/posts! It's good to learn that you are a "political realist" and I think you've given us some highly valuable advice.
That is a great line, PM. It is a wonderfully concise explanation of social corporatism...and right on the money about the how the elites think they really are elite and that they really should run things.
In my heart of hearts, I do believe they think of themselves as a new aristocracy (we know the Kennedy's have believed this for generations), and I do think they are fine with a "free market" so long as "the cronies" get to "run it" as the heads of government, corporations, and institutions.
The only real difference between aristocracy and the various forms of socialism is who gets to be "the elite".
The next thing you know they'll be inter-marrying. (Oh wait a minute....:-)
Good grief, you really are an uninformed moron, aren't you?
Look, I don't know yet how or whether I will vote in November. But I refuse to let you or anyone else make me feel guilty, whatever I do. When Obama wins, put the blame on the Republican party for betraying you and everyone else by forcing Romney on us.
So Agamemnon, what you’re saying is that we desperately need to vote for the pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda, anti-gun, pro-progressive taxation, pro-government run health care, tax and fee raising, cap-and-trade supporting, anti-American sovereignty, anti-religious freedom, pro-social spending progressive with an “R” after his name so we can beat the pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda, anti-gun, pro-progressive taxation, pro-government run health care, tax and fee raising, cap-and-trade supporting, anti-American sovereignty, anti-religious freedom, pro-social spending progressive with an “D” after his name?
And exactly what blithering difference does it make?
I can't imagine why you would think this. You mean a guy who the GOP base and drives off independents even more than McCain did can't beat Obama?
Good grief, it's almost like you're using common sense instead of wishful thinking, or something.
I compliment you on your knowledge of history and use of examples to make you points...and in these times, and particularly for this election, they are very valid points.
Romeny is certainly not the "perfet" conservative candidate, or anything close to it. Few are, including Newt and Santorum by the way.
But Romney as President with a majority GOP House and Senate (and hopefully more and more tea party types amongst them) will be orders of magnitude better for this Republic than four more years of the Kenyan Marxist we currently have as President. He wants to destroy this Republic and he is tenacuiously going about it.
Again, thanks, and BZ.
Mitt Romney needs to drop out of the race and stop stealing support from Virgil Goode.
Today’s environmental-whackos are like those Darwinists too...as are most liberal/progressives.
Stay with it, dear betty boop, you are impacting and influencing more people than you know in terms of lurkers, just as you surmized.
Once again, God’s speed.
This pretty much sums up the mentality of the pro-Romneyite on FR. Forget all that jazz about "principles" and "conservatism" and whatnot. People just dislike Romney 'cause he's a Mormon. That's the only reason. No other reason exists.
But how does somebody reason or communicate with someone who actually believes that? Seriously, how is communication with them even possible? If you have somebody who is willing to completely dismiss everything that somebody actually says about why they don't support Romney, and instead chalks it up to "they don't like Mormons," and makes this their vehilc for argumentation, then it's quite obvious that this person is beyond the help of reason. Such a person is an idiot - in the true and historical sense of the word. They are simply so wrapped up in themselves that they can't even begin to comprehend, much less fully understand, the motivations of other people. They're like the severely autistic child who exists in his own personal fact-space, a bubble cut off from the rest of the world.
I can understand why the people who have finlandised and chosen to support Romney have done so. I disagree with them, but I can understand their motivations. I can understand that they really and truly believe the naive proposition that Romney is significantly different than Obama, that he would be somehow "better" than Obama, or in the very least that somehow Romney, at least, would be "controllable" by the Right if he can be placed into office alongside a GOP-controlled Congressand Senate. Again, these are wrongheaded arguments with not a lick of actual evidence to support them, but I can understand why Romney supports make them. I don't simply assume that it's because they hate whatever religion it is that Virgil Goode belongs to.
It's sad to see the pro-Romney people on here forcing themselves to twist up their own mental realities to try to forcibly imprint "Romney is actually okay" onto the actual reality, which is that Romney is nothing more than a progressive who essentially holds the same worldview as Obama, and whose actual record shows that he has staked out largely the same positions as Obama. I realise that the Romney campaign shook the etch-a-sketch, and he now is having to pretend to take some conservative positions on his campaign website and whatnot, but as we've already been told by his own people, the etch-a-sketch will be shaken once again if he actually manages to beat his fellow progressive socialist. You folks who are expecting to have any leverage on Romney, or who even genuinely believe that he's turned over a new leaf are naive. I really and truly wish I had some beachfront property in Wyoming to sell you, because I'd make a bundle.
Especially Betty Boop, it's saddening to see the loop-de-loops to which you will resort to try to put a smiley face sticker on Romney's record. You don't seriously believe the nonsense you've written in your defences of him, do you? If so, then again, I wish I had that land to sell.
For those who have enough principles to not support Romney, for those who still actually care about the direction of the country instead of just getting Team R into office instead of Team D, I would urge you all to just ignore the pro-Romney people. Seriously. Reason doesn't work with them. Ideological appeal fails with them. Might as well spend your time more productively in searching out other people who don't like the current options. They're out there. I talk with a lot of people, and have not seen a mood like this for a long time, where conservatives, especially of the NON-Republican type, are turned off so strongly by both major party candidates. Supposedly conservative FReepers can spend their days convincing themselves that Romney's not really that bad - there are a lot of real, flesh-and-blood people out there who are not beholden to the GOP and who disagree. Let's reach them, instead of wasting our time on social autists.
Then you must vote your conscience as it is your sacred privilege to do.
I will absolutely do the same, and vote for Romney. That doesn't mean I'm "pro-abortion," by the way....
Agamemnon is right to point out that the two men standing for election (reelection) as president could not be where they are against God's Will. Effectively, we are given a choice of only these two candidates. I accept what I cannot change, and try to work through to the most good possible under the current conditions.
I personally don’t have any issues with mormons. Mitt Romney on the other hand has used Obama style manipulations and insults to get where he is.
His loss will be his own fault.
Word. I am not voting for Romney. Period.
It seems to me that one resorts to ad hominum arguments when one doesn't have any better argument. You aren't responding to your opponents in a rational fashion; you simply trash them.
Don't worry, BB, I intend to give your posts the thrashing they deserve (or perhaps, don't deserve would be a better way of putting it) later this afternoon when I get some more time.
You have commanded a great debate. I remain sold, and quite in your favor, against the pragmatic moderates arguing for the coronation of Romney Ruse out of their nicely nurtured and well groomed utter fear of Obama 2.0.
The fear filled who want to forever color inside the lines with only the crayons they have been assigned will never join in with any attack on the BIG PICTURE.
Rigidly ensconced in minutiae and in their microscopic analysis of minutiae, the realignment of capitalism with socialism will instead be met with the likes of a wing and a prayer, riding atop the Romney vehicle right into the straight wind of severe socialism.
In one particular case, you have to endure the insufferable self aggrandizement that accompanies countless attempts to dump you with cascades of minutiae, and yet you guys have managed to meet both the tactics and the chest pumping with admirable tolerance, returning again and again to your clear eyed intent to stand against the “fundamental transformation of America”. Sure as hell, this will not be overcome by the likes of Romney.
Thanks, and kuddos!
God be with us, and US with him.
She has actually lived in Mass while Romney was governor and has applied her knoweldge and experience to the equation and reached her conclusions. And you have the nerve and audacity to call here "socailly autistic?" To sarcastically indicate that her posts are nothing more than "loop de loops" trying to rationalize a vote for Romney when she doesn't "seriously believe the nonsense she's written," in effect calling her a liar?
Howgwash and absolute Bravo Sierra.
Let me quote your own words back to you, with just a couple of changes...changes susbstituting your own words again in your own earlier quote:
...how does somebody reason or communicate with someone who actually believes that? Seriously, how is communication with them even possible? If you have somebody who is willing to completely dismiss everything that somebody actually says about why they support Romney, and instead chalks it up to "loop de loops" and "social autusts"
You seem to be pretty good at doing the exact type of thing you accuse others of.
Fact is Betty Boop, as a very strong conservative behind enemey lines in Mass lived under the Romney governorship and she has some prtetty pointed things to say about it that do not happen to agree with the stereotype and absolute nature of the comments being made about Romney.
She has laid out why so many (not all) of the decisions that wre made in Mass simply had to be made that way because of the fact that the Mass legislature (and people) have hamstrung the governor as they have.
In addition to all that she has said, that perhaps, because of her longstanding reputation, we would be well served to consider, I personally know people in Mass who know the Romney's and attended church in the areas where he was an LDS leader...and they too, though they are very conservative and loyal Americans and do not support a number of positions that Romney has taken in the past, indicate that he is a good man, a loyal American, and a person of high moral integrity.
(I know this means that I am LDS and can easily be written off by you or others as "well, he's Mormon, what do you expect?") in the same manner you accuse others of writing counter arguements off because people don't like Mormons. So don't let that knife cut both ways...let's not let it cut at all. When it came time to vote in caucuses herein Idaho in the first round I voted for Santorum and in the second round (in our county) I voted for Newt. NEwt lost and ROmney won on that second ballot.
Fact is, Romney has a platform and set of issues he's been running on now for 5 or 6 years. They are written down. If he wins, it is what he will do. Based on what Betty Boop (whom I know and respect greatly) has told me, based on what my own personal friends have told me, based on his own statements in his campaign, it is clear that Rommney is running to define marriage as between a single man and woman, that he is not for gay marriage, that he is running as a pro-life candidate, that he intends to strengthen America's military and foreign policy, that he intends to repeal Obama Care, that he intends to drastically cut spending by the Federal Government (including gutting Planned Parenthood) and that he intends to balance the budget, to cut federal government regulation and corporate and personal taxes, and to get the free market economic engine running again.
These are the things he says he will do, and they are based on the changes he says he has made. And they are all good things.
I have a lot of people here pointing to things he has said and done in the past and trying to convince me that he still is what he was...that he has not changed...that he is only paying lip service and that he is, in essence ieing. The fact is, some of the things he says today I clearly do not agree with.
But, balanced against that I know people now who lived under his governance who say things (like betty whom I trust impeccably) which indicate he wasn't nearly as bad as he is painted out to be. I know people who know him personally who I trust impeccably who say he is a good man, family wise, community wise, and integrity wise...who know him personally in his daily walk. I personally have studied his record, the way things were organized in Mass, his vetoes (and everyone really should look at the things he tried to veto), and although there is a lot about his record I do not agree with, and there are things he says today that I do not agree with, based on all of this and what he is actually running on (as you say what he is actually saying), I must conclude that he would clearly be orders of magnitudse better for the Republic than Obama.
Still, he is by no means the perfect, or close to the perfect conservative candidate.
But the fact is, given the organization, given the ballots of the fifty states, given the dollars available, there is NO ONE who could possibly defeat Barack Obama in November other than Mitt Romney. Sorry, but that is the fact...that is the pragmatic, realistic situation we are in.
So I will vote for him because I will do nothing by my action or inaction to give Obama another four years where he is willfully and very quickly doing all in his power and quite a ferw things that are not delegated to him in pwoer that he is doing anyway, to destroy this Republic.
Romney is doing no such thing. He is not planning to do any such thing, and in fact what he is running on is actually a pretty good conservative platform when you just let it stand on its own. Given the totality of my own experiences, studies, and information from people I trust and respect, I do not expect a victorious Romney to be liberal or progressive, I expect he will be much further towrds conservative than all of this mantra suggests, and I believe a House and Senate in the majority with a lot more Tea Party candidates will deliver up the legislation for him to sign that keeps it that way.
we have absolutely no chance of that with Obama and the simple fact is if it is not Romney then it will be Obama.
So, I will vote for and support Romney and pray to God in HEaven that Obama can be defeated and that a Romney administration, coupled with the majority House and Senate will turn the nation away from the precipice and start to get us back on firm footing. I believe they will if we elect them and that is what I am going to do all in my power to accomplish.
Four legs good.
Two legs bad - unless the have two far-left feet.
When you start with a false premise, all your conclusions are bound to be wrong.
I almost feel sorry for you guys, sitting there licking the hand that gives you a little nibble of the crumbs every once in a while. FR used to be a place where actual conservatives congregated. Now it seems to be a place where pseudo-conservatives with no principles congregate to pat themselves on the back for supporting Team R through think and thin.
It's a shame FR doesn't have a little more of the spirit JimRob himself displayed not so long ago:
Youre not getting the message. Im not going to support or vote for that evil abortionist/socialist bastard Romney come hell or high water...
If this is the best they have to offer, eff the GOP!!
I fully concur with JimRob on this point. If Romney is the best that the GOP can offer, then the GOP does not deserve my vote. Period.
Neither you nor he know any of this. You don't know that it isn't God's will to step in, suddenly change the hearts of the plurality of the people in this country towards someone like Virgil goode, and leave both "major" parties high and dry. It may not be, it probably isn't, but you have no earthly idea whether it actually is or not, so stop trying to hide behind "it's God's will." Who knows? Maybe the GOP nominated Romney because it's God's will to give us a second term of Obamna, and nominating such an obvious spineless moron as Romney is the way to bring that about "under the sun"? Who knows, maybe I'm *supposed* to vote third party so that this happens, and brings God's will to pass? How would you or Agamemnon ever know the difference? You wouldn't.
Yes - the chances are that Romney or Obama will win, at least as it looks at present. But it's nothing but pridefulness to assume that what we infer from probability is "God's will." Sorry, but you simply cannot make a theologically credible argument about God's will prior to an event happening, unless you have specific revelation from the Word of God about that event in prophecy.
Granted, either Romney or Obama likely will be President next year. America is under God's judgment, and either of those two candidates will be a quite suitable vehicle for the pouring out of that judgment. However, like the prophets in Israel who, knowing the nation was under judgment, nevertheless continued to try to turn the people away from wickedness and following wicked kings, I will do the same thing in America, even with two wicked "major" party candidates.
Great tagline Rita.
Fear of going “really really slovenly” has forced these folks to accept “really slovenly”.
In either case, it’s the Prodigal in the pig pen deep in muck not yet come to his senses. In that frame of mind he rejoiced when he got out of the center of the muck and a bit closer to the trough.
Alas, he was still fed slop.
Their mantra is "free speech for me but not for thee".
Put on your flame-proof undies, as you will be attacked not only for your words, but for your audacity in daring to post them.
This is the MittBots answer to Jim's "truce"...they have taken it as a complete surrender by him. They see FR as another link in the Romney PR campaign.
You don’t happen to work for one of those nonprofits created by Romney’s Climate ‘Protection’ Plan, do you? Because he created quite a few, in order to save the world.
No one ever said you were not free to say what you want...or even implied it. My point was simple. BB is well known for her positions and activities and dedication over a long period of years and perhaps her own thoughts on the matter based on living in Mass when Romney was governor are worthy of consideration.
Your attempts to characterize her, myself and others as “choosing to ignore him because of irrational fear and naivete, as are you, Agamemnon, and the rest who are quivering in fear,” and, “licking the hand that gives you a little nibble of the crumbs every once in a while...” are part of your freedom to express those views.
But for those who know us and of our own activities over the years, our own involvement, and to what degree we have gone to risk all in these efforts...such a characterization is so far off the mark as to be laughable.
We simply disagree, Yash...and that is fine.
I have not called you names, placed your honor, integrity, or bravery into question as a result of that disagreement, or disparaged you because of it. I have simpluy tried to point out reasons, again, why some of the points BB and others make are worthy of consideration.
Instead, you choose to make bald faced assetrtions about others which are simply false and meant only to marginalize those with whom you disagree as if though by simply stating such rediculous, bombastic statements it makes them true...almost like you were taking such points right out of Alinsky’s play book. Can’t you see that?
Again, you are free to say, feel, and voice your opinion however you feel. But that does not make what you say so, and particularly when you use such methods to try and score your points. It certainly does not serve the cause that you yourself espouse as critical for the Republic very well because such ad homion and vitriol does nothing to convince or move others toward your cause.
Prehaps you don’t care...and that’s fine too. But, IMHO, the end game of such a path and attitude towards others is a relatively small echo chamber that, again, does not serve your purpose well at all in helping the Republic.
One rea we can hopefully certainly agree on and must do in any case is to support an elect as many true conservatives into the House and Senate in Washington as possible, and into our state houses and county court houses. We will need them all in any case and I am committed to and will continue to do all in my power to impact that course of action as well.
What is false about my premise?
Well, it’s self-evidently untrue. Americans always have other choices. We’re not the Soviet Union.
Priceless commentary there.
Having thought this through I, too, concur that the having two secular moral midgets thrust before us now are hardly a pronouncement of heavenly favor. Nor is this a contest between good and evil, but equal evils, equal records, equal goals, seeking equal outcomes, using same or differing methods only on occasion. The ENDS are the same except for the means, which amounts to nothing much, but for the ponies they ride in on. One branded (R).
LOL...that's the second favorite accusation from the MittBots/mormons....
This is usually resorted to when other FReepers refuse to give in to the "vote against Romney is a vote for Obama" lecture.
But for those who know "us" and of our own activities over the years, our own involvement, and to what degree we have gone to risk all in these efforts...such a characterization is so far off the mark as to be laughable.
What exclusive "us" are you speaking of, Jeff? I've been here since 2001, and I recall a whole list of FReepers involved in "activities, involvements and risk" that do not necessarily agree with the ABOs.
Again, you are free to say, feel, and voice your opinion however you feel. But that does not make what you say so, and particularly when you use such methods to try and score your points.....
Gee, I haven't seen Yashcheritsiy using accusations of "alinksy" in trying to score points. That really looks like a "bald faced assetrtions about others which are simply false and meant only to marginalize those with whom you disagree as if though by simply stating such rediculous, bombastic statements".
IMO, you might want to read your words in which you begin with "No one ever said you were not free to say what you want" to find an attempt to "marginalize those with whom you disagree."
because such ad homion and vitriol does nothing to convince or move others toward your cause.
As I've suggested, read your own words. This is an open forum not a place in which one FReeper has "authority" over another with a podium to stand behind and lecture from.
Yeah; hatred IS an ugly thing all right!
Are you still killing your unborn?
Future brimstone smellers?
20. Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous
21. that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."
4. Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house.
5. They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
6. Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him
7. and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.
Isaiah 3:9 The look on their faces testifies against them; they parade their sin like Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to them! They have brought disaster upon themselves.
2 Peter 2:13b Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.
49. "`Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.
50. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.
1. But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
3. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
4. For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment;
5. if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;
6. if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;
7. and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men
8. (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)--
9. if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.
10. This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority. Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings;
11. yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord.
12. But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish.
13. They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.
But there IS hope!!!
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9. Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived:
Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
10. nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
If you could NOT change, you would be in most pitiful shape...
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;
and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,
and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.
Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)
What are the other choices?
|The Official Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
© 2006 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.
are there no Converative women who just happen to be Mormons that you know of ???
Why dont you run one of them for president if there are ???
youre wasting more than half your eligible candidates for office...
all the women...
Look at all the groups who would vote for a woman...
1. You have the Conservatives...if she if pro-life, small government, 2A etc...
2. you have the liberal women...the PUMAs are still angry at Obama..
3. If shes a veteran you can get the veterans and the military..
4. If shes black, the black voters will go for her...
5. and the men who wont vote for Romney...
Why dont Mormon women ever run for POTUS ???
or even Gov of Utah ???
or US senate from Utah ???
The base wouold not be shattered as it is now...
and the base would get behind a woman POTUS nominee like that much more than they ever will behind the liberal Willard...
Or cash in their Gentile wallets!
I'm accustomed to the "alinsky" accusation from the Religion Forum where it is thrown around all the time.
As I said, read your own words...I just quoted them back to you.
BTW Betty Boop has been around for a long time and I don't recall her ever needing the kind of "help" you provided in that post, and I don't recall her ever saying something like "But for those who know "us" and of our own activities over the years, our own involvement, and to what degree we have gone to risk all in these efforts.."
She has NEVER, to my knowledge resorted to an "us vs. you" statement.
I have to laugh at your statement, "Your apparent efforts to try and turn the tables on people, who were not even referencing you, (was Yash referencing YOU in his post to Betty?) and go around like some kind of thread moderator or referee (and a slanted one at that IMHO, against those willing to vote for Romney in order to defeat Obama) are, well...IMHO just plain old lame."
LOLOL...This is an open forum, remember? I don't have to be "referenced" and your post to Yash was hypocritical as you did YOUR thread moderating thing, (LOLOL) in trying to shut him up. Frankly, I see you trying to "turn the tables" in highjacking xzins thread about Virgil Goode.
Are you MittBots so afraid that a REAL, honest candidate's plan will be featured on FR?
BTW, "thanks just the same for your continued efforts to clarify the discussion between other individuals to your own ends."....LOLOL!...just what is the name of this thread???
In every generation, there are those who want to rule well--but they mean to rule.
They promise to be good masters--but they mean to be masters.
So; Mitt's record has NOTHING to do with it at all; eh?
I see many claims made by MORMONism and it has me convinced that the real motivation of Mitt's run for the Presidency is religious.
...the presidential campaign of Mormon Church founder Joseph Smith in 1844: Challenging Democrat James Polk and Whig Henry Clay, Smith prophesied that if the U.S. Congress did not accede to his demands that they shall be broken up as a government and God shall damn them.
Smith viewed capturing the presidency as part of the mission of the church.
-- George Washington
I wonder if Romney has made any OATHS to his church that the populace of the United States would be interested in?
Ignoring the FACTS is one of the main traits of MORMONs.
The ABO contingent consists of a LOT of them; content to try to stay below the radar of AMERICA.
Their reasoning for wanting to get rid of Obama, is mainly, religious; but they couch it in SAVE THE NATION! rhetoric.