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

Skip to comments.

Romney: The Boy Scouts should admit homosexuals
Life Side News ^ | 8/7/2012 | Ben Johnson

Posted on 08/08/2012 5:27:53 AM PDT by IbJensen

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-174 next last
To: NFHale; stephenjohnbanker; IbJensen; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; ...
RE :”Why doesn’t Romney just hand the election over to Obama right now

That is what it looks to me like he has been doing, although a few ABBOs pinged me a few days ago to tell me that Romney is crushing Obama WHOOOPIE.

Romney still seems to be running on:
Don't worry about me, the economy is bad so I know you will vote for me NO MATTER who I am ”.

Obama is running on :
You cant trust Romney because all he cares about is making money and his rich fat-cat friends and he will raise your taxes to pay for tax cuts for the rich and he is a slave to the Tea party and took their terrible positions even though he wont talk about them or defend them because he knows you will hate them and him too.

So far this isnt much of race. If this keeps up Romney causing problems as POTUS will not be a possiblity.

101 posted on 08/08/2012 12:32:41 PM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: NFHale; stephenjohnbanker; IbJensen; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy
RE :"We all unanimously agreed that it was unacceptable to have our boys anywhere near queer scoutmasters, should the organization cave in and allow them into the program."

You are forgetting Big Gay Al from Southpark. He was great with kids.


102 posted on 08/08/2012 12:40:01 PM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: xzins

xzins and other FRiends,

Is there a RISK that Romney will not live up to our highest expectations? Yes.

Is there a CERTAINTY that Obama will continue deploying policies designed to destroy America? Yes!

Did those “Conservatives”, who found they were too self-righteous to vote for McCain in 2008, thereby HELP America? No.

Did those “Conservatives”, who found they were too self-righteous to vote for McCain in 2008, thereby ENSURE that a candidate more to their liking would be nominated in 2012? I guess not!

So I’d appreciate it someone could explain to me how attacking Romney now will save America from Obama’s second term...


103 posted on 08/08/2012 1:08:57 PM PDT by pfony1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Chaplain, my friend, if this upsets you, take a look at this ...

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/08/08/the-moment-all-the-doubts-about-romney-resurfaced-on-the-right/

104 posted on 08/08/2012 1:13:52 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Conservatism is not a matter of convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg

Same spokeswoman as with the boy scout statement.

Now we know that Mitt thinks RomneyCare is AOK.

There must be a village someplace in massachusetts missing an idiot.


105 posted on 08/08/2012 1:19:45 PM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode Not Evil: The lesser of 2 evils is still evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: pfony1
I did hold my nose and vote for McCain. (At least McCain was pro-life.)

In any case, in just the last 3 months Romney has come out in favor of:

gay couples

gay adoption

gun control

RomneyCare/government health care

silence on freedom of religion/speech

Let me suggest, pfony, that Romney is doing his level best to lose this election. As this article points out, he has social conservatives so demoralized/dispirited that they are not going to be out working for him, if they'll even vote for him.

He might as well have slapped us in the face.

106 posted on 08/08/2012 1:25:52 PM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode Not Evil: The lesser of 2 evils is still evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; stephenjohnbanker; IbJensen; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy

They can go form their own organizations and have their own little recruiting parties.

I have “zero tolerance” for anyone messing with kids. To my mind, if someone is caught molesting a child, he should be beaten to within an inch of his life. The mental damage done to a child is lifelong - all because of some selfish deviant’s momentary (or repetitive in the case of Sandusky) act.

We still have a First Amendment right of free association. And we need to jealously guard and defend it, and close ranks around the Boy Scouts to help them.

There was a time in this country when Men wouldn’t put up with this sh*t. It’s time to bring that back.


107 posted on 08/08/2012 1:27:39 PM PDT by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: so_real

There is no line to be drawn with this sack of crap.

I don’t see one of them worth the price of the gasoline to drive the 4 miles to the polls.

I will go to get Obama out of the White House, that is my goal.


108 posted on 08/08/2012 1:33:06 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

CAN you quote your source?


109 posted on 08/08/2012 1:33:47 PM PDT by richardtavor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: NFHale

I’m not sure if he made a recent comment, he may have, but I found an instance where he did it in 1994. Is that what this is about?

I don’t approve of it either way, but it sure sheds new light on the subject.

We can’t talk about what Obama did past noon yesterday, and yet we can go back 18 years on Romney.

[ When I say we, I’m referencing the nation at large, the DNCp ]


110 posted on 08/08/2012 1:47:27 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Nope 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: NFHale

Evidently, if you can believe the DNCp he still holds the same view.

This all stemmed from that 1994 comment I mentioned, and a reporter asked the campaign if he still held the same beliefs.

I wonder if they’ll get around to asking Obama if he still holds the same views concering Mary Jane and blow.


111 posted on 08/08/2012 1:51:30 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Nope 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

“...When I say we, I’m referencing the nation at large...”

I understand, D-1.

Here’s my point: Romney says something like this, but doesn’t push a LAW mandating it.

This current POS would, if he thought he could get away with it. He’s laying low because of the flack he took from the black churches over the queer marriage thing. He’s perfectly content with letting Romney take flak for something he himself supports.

People can say what they want about the Dems, but they fight to win this war.

“Our” side just twists with the wind over and over. And it’s getting old...very old.


112 posted on 08/08/2012 1:55:16 PM PDT by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

“...I wonder if they’ll get around to asking Obama if he still holds the same views concering Mary Jane and blow....”

Doubt it.

They’ll ask him such in-depth, penetrating questions like “WHAT is yer favorite color...?”

“WHAT is the average airspeed velocity of a swallow [African or European?]”

“WHAT is yer name?”

And of course, he’ll need a teleprompter to answer...


113 posted on 08/08/2012 1:58:09 PM PDT by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: NFHale

I agree with your thoughts on this. We both know Romney isn’t worth a hill of beans, but it does bother me to see the DNCp act as if Obama is.

Romney isn’t worth a hill of beans, but Obama is certainly a mound of used beans.

Here’s a note of levity: This is Obama...

Click on the graphic to enlarge. [ Michael Ramirez ]

Click left and right arrow top right corner to scroll through more. Be patient...

http://www.gocomics.com/michaelramirez/2012/05/15


114 posted on 08/08/2012 2:06:09 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Nope 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: redpoll

Politicians are puffed-up, narcissistic fools. Just look at the Chicago sewer rat holed up in the White Hut.

They cater to the pedestaled homosexuals like they’re some exhaulted constituency that must never be riled. Of course they treat muslims pretty much the same way.

Perhaps they don’t understand just who their consituency is much like the CEO of Amazon and his wifey donating 2.5 million to the sodomist cause and believing there won’t be a backlash as though their largest customer base was the gaggle of homosexuals who contaminate America.


115 posted on 08/08/2012 2:07:19 PM PDT by IbJensen (If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

“And if they admited homosexual adults, I can guarantee you my son wouldn’t be anywhere near them.”

This is what I don’t understand. How do you explain why it’s OK to admit gay Scouts but then turn around and deny homosexual men the chance to serve as Scout leaders? Yet if the latter happened, many parents would be quite reluctant to let their sons go into scouting.

On a related point, would Mitt Romney favor letting male and female adolescent Scouts share the same tent overnight? Presumably not. So why would it be a good idea to let a straight and gay adolescent share the same tent overnight? The reality is that Scouting inevitably entails some intimacy of contact especially on overnight activities. Most straight Scouts aren’t going to be comfortable viewed by individuals who may have a sexual attraction to them whether it be undressing for bedtime in a tent or for swimming etc. I’m pretty sure there would be an uproar if equal rights advocates insisted that females be permitted to join Boy Scouts or vice versa. And the legitimate reason to deny females membership has nothing to do with their abilities, but everything to do with the undesirability of encouraging unwanted sexual contact even if it is only visual in nature.

That reason is equally applicable to gay Scouts. If someone wants to start Gay Scouts of America, all power to them. But that is a far different proposition than forcing heterosexual Scouts to be (literally) exposed to gay Scouts against their will.


116 posted on 08/08/2012 2:10:54 PM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Everytime I cross over the line to full ABO thinking regardless of my dissatisfaction with Romney he pulls the legs out from under me yet again.

Even if he beats ABO, he’s not going to change a damn thing and instead of destroying the country in 4 years he’ll do it in 6-8 years.

I’m afraid we are doomed. And we have no country to move to.

Let’s face it, it comes down to individual states. We conservatives need to take as many states as possible (KS made great moves in their primary yesterday) and force Congress to move in their direction.

Pass as many conservative ideas and scream 9th and 10th amendment. Then ignore federal courts trying to stop them. Let those judges enforce their rulings!


117 posted on 08/08/2012 2:16:35 PM PDT by Fledermaus (Democrats are dangerous and evil. Republicans are useless and useful idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

My viewpoint exactly.

I wasn’t going to vote for him, and only recently figured I’d have to force myself, just to get rid of 0kaka. But now - no way, I cannot force my self to vote for Romney, I’d choke to death on my own vomit.


118 posted on 08/08/2012 2:19:49 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SZonian

Just see this for what it is. This is put out by Obama. I saw on the Huffington Post today this quote from Obama:“The President believes the Boy Scouts is a valuable organization that has helped educate and build character in American boys for more than a century,” White House spokesperson Shin Inouye said. “He also opposes discrimination in all forms, and as such opposes this policy that discriminates on basis of sexual orientation.” Why do you suppose he put out the same statement they dug up from Romney? I’m saddened to see that you are giving this the exact outcome they hoped for.


119 posted on 08/08/2012 2:43:35 PM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

I am sure there are more learned Scouters on this forum, but here goes:

I am an Eagle Scout, my two sons are Eagles, and I have been a registered Scout or Leader for over 40 years. I have attended a lot of training classes, including Commissioner’s College, and was the point person with Sen. Jesse Helms’ office when he wrote the Boy Scouts’ equal access to rent school property law.

There are two rules in the BSA that are at issue here. The first is that no leader can have a conversation with anyone under 18 about anything sexual. You cannot ever talk about it with a youth or you, as a leader, will be permanently expelled.

The second rule is that Scouts cannot be sexually active.

The combination of the two rules creates a situation similar to don’t ask - don’t tell, HOWEVER, it also implies that if a leader is confronted with undeniable third-party proof that a Scout is sexually active (Susy is preggers and Scout Johnny admits paternity and it is “common knowledge”), then the Scout should be investigated for expulsion. If a leader finds out about Johnny and Susy, they are instructed to contact the Council Executive and report the matter. The leader is then suspended until the investigation is concluded (no big deal). A trained team takes over the investigation and includes experts from BSA Texas HQ. Most scouts in this situation resign quietly and there is not further action.

The rules apply to straight and homosexual Scouts equally.

The rules for adult leaders are different and are meant to prevent homosexuals from becoming leaders. The Catholic priest scandals have given the BSA a lot of cover here.

So, our Troop, with over 100 Eagles, has has some Eagles come back and tell us (when they are over 18), that they are homosexuals. Our position is absolutely neutral and they know they cannot return as leaders. The BSA rule is “Once an Eagle, always an Eagle”, so we let it go. After all, they are adults and we have zero authority at that point.

On a personal level, if a former Scout (now an adult) asks for advice, we can individually decide to guide him toward counseling, but that is not a BSA call.

Hope this helps.


120 posted on 08/08/2012 2:49:07 PM PDT by Andy from Chapel Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SZonian

Just see this for what it is. This is put out by Obama. I saw on the Huffington Post today this quote from Obama:“The President believes the Boy Scouts is a valuable organization that has helped educate and build character in American boys for more than a century,” White House spokesperson Shin Inouye said. “He also opposes discrimination in all forms, and as such opposes this policy that discriminates on basis of sexual orientation.” Why do you suppose he put out the same statement (at least the end part)they dug up from Romney? I’m saddened to see that you are giving this the exact outcome they hoped for. This is politics pure and simple. At least Romney showed support for the scouts freedom to choose it’s members but it seems to me Obama rushed this statement out to show that he is not so different from Romney. Don’t fall for this.


121 posted on 08/08/2012 2:52:24 PM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg

You are degenerating into pure lying to conceal the truth about Romney and his devotion to the homosexual agenda.

MITT ROMNEY
“For some voters it might be enough for me to simply match my opponent’s record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will.”
(snip)
“One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.”


122 posted on 08/08/2012 2:58:53 PM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors,,, where the GOP goes for it's "conservative" Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: richardtavor

Yes I have the source, the actual source is the PDF, but the FR thread shows it in text.

Here it is in text as a freerepublic thread, it also links to the PDF of Mitt’s letter.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949744/posts


123 posted on 08/08/2012 3:01:09 PM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors,,, where the GOP goes for it's "conservative" Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg

They didn’t “dig up” anything from Romney, Romney himself, through his campaign reaffirmed his position. Trying to stay in the squishy middle, like a good little rino. Pandering to a single digit minority in this country who aren’t going to vote for him anyway.

He’s doing nothing but confirming and reaffirming what many on FR have been saying for years about him. He’s a liberal dressed up with an R “designation”.

Anybody with half of a living brain cell knows that “statement” from 0bama is pure pap. The BSA represents everything that douche is against. Period.

What I do know is that anyone who claims to be “conservative” and then says queers should be allowed in the BSA should be viewed with a high degree of suspicion and summarily dismissed as conservative.

Yet, you persist in refusing to acknowledge the danger his position has the potential to create for the boys in Scouting.

Again, it lends credibility to the pro-homo agenda in their quest to destroy the BSA and you have yet to even address or acknowledge that simple fact.


124 posted on 08/08/2012 3:06:38 PM PDT by SZonian (Throwing our allegiances to political party's in the long run gave away our liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg

125 posted on 08/08/2012 3:23:44 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("If you're not fiscally AND socially conservative, you're not conservative!" - Jim Robinson, 9-1-10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: pfony1

Did those “Conservatives”, who found they were too self-righteous to vote for McCain in 2008, thereby HELP America? No.

Bull puckey. In retrospect they HELPED America a great deal. If McCain had been POTUS, the Sea Treaty (click) would have been ratified. After telling us the Sea Treaty compromised U.S. sovereignty, McCain not only approved its ratification, but led the charge among the Senate republicans. Like Boehner, he would have instructed his team to get their "asses in line" for the sake of "party unity". Only because Obama and liberals are in power did the conservatives in the Senate have an easy decision in standing up for America and against that treaty.

I voted *for* Palin and McWhatsHisName was along for the ride. Maybe that was a mistake, maybe it wasn't. But unlike you, I won't denigrate my conservative FRiends who voted their conscience and didn't pull the lever for McCain. As far as McCain is concerned, they were right on the money. And America remains secure on its nautical borders because of their bravery in the face of complete idiots throwing daggers their way back in 2008.


126 posted on 08/08/2012 3:33:42 PM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

What is the Girl Scout policy on male leaders?


127 posted on 08/08/2012 3:38:02 PM PDT by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg
He threw the gay community a little bone so they didn’t freak out. I think it was smart of him to do so.

Step back and look at your own words. You don't want to stand there.

128 posted on 08/08/2012 4:55:23 PM PDT by donna ("...gay couples raising kids. That's the American way..." -Mitt Romney, 2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: rockinqsranch

There are no conservatives running for president in the major parties. The 3rd parties have at least a couple. The choices for conservatives are pretty simple: stay home, vote for a 3rd party conservative, or join the Any Socialist But Obama crowd...and lose just the same.


129 posted on 08/08/2012 5:45:45 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Romney/Pelosi 2012- the Spirit of Bipartisanship!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

Choosing between hussein and willard is like choosing whether you’d prefer to be castrated with chain saw or a salad fork.

Its a false choice for conservatives. There are 3rd party candidates on the ballot who are actually deserving of your vote.

But Ooooh! Ooooh! They can’t win!

So explain to me how you’re going to “win” with willard or hussein?


130 posted on 08/08/2012 5:52:44 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Romney/Pelosi 2012- the Spirit of Bipartisanship!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

Then please explain how we “win” if willard is elected?

Will we have an anti abortion president?

Will we have a pro gun president?

Will we have a president who opposes socialized medicine?

Inquiring minds want to understand what a conservative “victory” looks like under president willard.


131 posted on 08/08/2012 6:02:48 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Romney/Pelosi 2012- the Spirit of Bipartisanship!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601
"Romney: The Boy Scouts should admit homosexuals"

Well, that explains this...

The Kenyan must go.

132 posted on 08/08/2012 6:23:12 PM PDT by ex91B10 (We've tried the Soap Box,the Ballot Box and the Jury Box; ONE BOX LEFT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: donna

He has to be EVERYONE’S President(after November), not just the the people who he is in perfect agreement with. If that’s what you hope for, all you will get is another Obama. He only represents the people who think like him. Frankly I have had enough of that. People will never agree on everything. Mitt is allowed an opinion, even if it’s different from yours.


133 posted on 08/08/2012 6:54:26 PM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat

Excellent post. Right on the mark.


134 posted on 08/08/2012 7:04:37 PM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: xzins
However, she said Romney, who served as a member of its executive board, has not pressured the organization to change its stance and does not wish to see the Scouts forced to accept homosexuals. LifeSiteNews.com revealed that some chapters of the Boy Scouts do not consider the national organization’s prohibition of homosexuals serving as scouts or adult leaders binding policy.

How can they reconcile that to Romans chapter 1? You teach kids good morals by the Commandments and principles in The Bible and by your own example in your life.

It seems like every waking hour of the day now is the media obsession of pushing gay marriage and glorifying it. Of course they are writing the propaganda as we sleep as well :>{

135 posted on 08/08/2012 8:48:38 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg

I have nothing to say to you.


136 posted on 08/08/2012 9:42:20 PM PDT by donna ("...gay couples raising kids. That's the American way..." -Mitt Romney, 2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

He often has a poorly drawn cigarette in his hand, terrible role model!!!!


137 posted on 08/09/2012 12:08:08 AM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg; donna; cva66snipe
Mitt is allowed an opinion, even if it’s different from yours.

Of course he's allowed an opinion, Mars, and his is in direct disagreement with that of social conservatives. He is pro-homosexualism, pro-gun control, pro-choice, and pro-big government. Mine is pro-heterosexual, pro-gun, pro-life, and pro-small government.

Now, is there any difference in power between a president and any of us freepers? Sure there is. A president signs legislation, vetos legislation, signs executive orders, nominates primary leadership of the nation, commands our armed forces and sets its agenda, executes the laws of our nation, etc.

Do you honestly believe that absolutely none of those powers of the president are influenced by his unique set of opinions?

So, a president's opinion is not just any old opinion.

Does it matter that Obama believes in socialism? After all, it is just an opinion.

138 posted on 08/09/2012 3:15:50 AM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode Not Evil: The lesser of 2 evils is still evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat

Put up two columns and list the positive outcomes of each. The difference between Romney and Obama can easily be seen, which IS the point.

Personally, I wanted Gingrich....however, my overriding motivation in this election is to get Obama OUT!

Our economy is in great peril. It IS key to our national security. Romney will begin to repair this....and it will take a great deal of time before we recover. Later, we can put in far more conservative leadership...IF we are working hard on the local and state levels.

Ohhhh...and we will work to put even MORE conservatives into the House and Senate. THAT will be a good check on Romney.


139 posted on 08/09/2012 4:57:02 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat

TOTALLY illogical...since there is not enough support to elect ANY 3rd party candidate at this time in history. To stay home or to vote 3rd party will OBVIOUSLY help Obama.

Be conservative and be SMART: Get Obama OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!


140 posted on 08/09/2012 5:03:30 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Does it matter that Obama believes in socialism? After all, it is just an opinion.

I disagree. It is not an opinion. It is an ideology. There is a big difference. Mitt, even in the quote we are dissecting, knew the difference between having and opinion and forcing it on others. Obamas belief in Socialism dictates everything in his life. He has no problem forcing his beliefs on an unwilling public. Therein lies the difference.


141 posted on 08/09/2012 5:55:40 AM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

The very first Republican presidential candidate was John C Fremont. If you don't recognize the name, it's because he didn't win. The year was 1856 and the Republicans were the totally illogical 3rd party candidate providers of the day. We owe a great deal of gratitude to the 30% of the population in 1856 that did not wait for a sure-thing and voted for the Republican candidate regardless. The nation needed a party of opposition back then. We need one today even more. Be conservative and be smart: vote like a conservative CONSISTENTLY. It takes courage to do the right thing, in 1856 and in 2012.


142 posted on 08/09/2012 6:06:20 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg

So, you think Romneycare, $50 abortions, gay adoption, and gay marriage in Massachusetts — all during the reign of Romney — are coincidental?

He acts on his beliefs, too, Mars. Don’t be sucked in. I understand ABOs wanting to prevent another Obama term. I really do.

But, did you see the thread on FR yesterday about “Housebreaking Romney”? Some on the conservative, ABO side are starting to realize they need to smack Mitt upside the head when he strays off the reservation.


143 posted on 08/09/2012 6:39:56 AM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode Not Evil: The lesser of 2 evils is still evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita; RKBA Democrat

Sum, there are conservatives whose religion or beliefs simply won’t permit them to vote for a pro-gun control, pro-big government, pro-choice, pro-homosexual agenda Rino. I think you understnad that. It would violate my relationship with my God to support that.

Our options are to either not vote at all at the top of the ticket, or to sent a message by a meaningless write-in name, or to vote for a 3rd party that we think actually has a chance of developing into something significant some day.

I like the 3rd option, and Virgil Goode is far, far more conservative than Mitt ever lied about being.


144 posted on 08/09/2012 6:44:38 AM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode Not Evil: The lesser of 2 evils is still evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Believe me...I will fight for the right of anyone to vote as he/she chooses. However, it makes me wonder what religion or belief would not permit taking the best route to rid this nation of the worst inhabitant of the White House in its history!!?!

As for a 3rd party....that must be constructed from the ground up and MUST have tremendous voter support BEFORE it can succeed. We have no such thing ...yet.


145 posted on 08/09/2012 6:51:02 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

life, homosexuality, the responsibility to protect oneself and one’s family....those all render Romney unsupportable for me. It would cause me to choose between God and mitt, and that’s a no-brainer.

Every new endeavor starts with a first step, and it has to start at some point in time. Why not when already confronted with someone it’s impossible to support due to a huge ideological chasm?


146 posted on 08/09/2012 7:15:13 AM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode Not Evil: The lesser of 2 evils is still evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: xzins

It looks like we could go back and forth on this all day but in the end the question is “who will you be voting for?”
Sure, I am disappointed that Santorum (he was my choice) isn’t our candidate, but you will NEVER EVER catch me voting for Obama. If you choose to stay home you will be helping Obama get elected. If you vote for a 3rd party candidate you will be helping Obama. So what is your plan?
Who, exactly are you asking me to put my support behind?


147 posted on 08/09/2012 7:42:11 AM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: xzins

It looks like we could go back and forth on this all day but in the end the question is “who will you be voting for?”
Sure, I am disappointed that Santorum (he was my choice) isn’t our candidate, but you will NEVER EVER catch me voting for Obama. If you choose to stay home you will be helping Obama get elected. If you vote for a 3rd party candidate you will be helping Obama. So what is your plan?
Who, exactly are you asking me to put my support behind?


148 posted on 08/09/2012 7:42:26 AM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg

I went from Perry, to Gingrich, to Santorum. (Those 2 disappointed me when it became obvious that one needed to throw his weight behind the other.)

So, since I cannot support Mitt, I’ll be supporting the Constitution Party, which is already on our ballot here in Ohio. It has been showing well the last few elections, and there’s a real possibility of having it build into a local force here in southern Ohio.

The advent of the Republican Party proved in the 1850’s that building a new party, given the electoral college restrictions in our constitution, must start at the level of congressional districts. The basic reason for running a presidential candidate while a party is building from the ground up is visibility, name brand stuff. The real work is at county, state legislature, and ultimately congressional district level.


149 posted on 08/09/2012 7:53:35 AM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode Not Evil: The lesser of 2 evils is still evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: marstegreg
Seems to me he said FIRST that he supports their right to do as they please.

Big deal. Barney Frank would even take that position.

Romney should be allowd to feel however he wants as long as he does not impose his beliefs on others. It’s called freedom.

And, I and thousands of others that are repulsed by the homosexual agenda simply will refuse to vote for him. Republicans can lose the White House until hell freezes over if it puts up a pro-homosexual candidate.

150 posted on 08/09/2012 8:06:55 AM PDT by Kazan (Mitt Romney: The greater of two evils)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-174 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